E 

33£ 


THE 
PRET  E  NSION  s    OF 

THOMAS    JEFFERSON 

TO      THE 

PRESIDENCT 
EXAMINED  ; 

AND      THE 
C  II  J  R  G  E  S      AGAINST 

JOHN      ADAMS 

REFUTED. 


JDDRESSED   TO   THE  CITIZENS  OF    AMERICA  IN  GENERAL) 


AND   PARTICULARLY    TO    THE 


ELECTORS 


OF      THE 


P      R      ESI     D      E      N 


\ 
UNITED  STATES,  October  1796. 


,        C 


A  WRITER  under  the  fignature  of  Hampden,  in  the  Rich- 
mond paper  of  the  ift  inftant,  after  afterting  the  exclu- 
five  right  of  Virginia  to  fill  the  office  of  Prefident,  calls  the  at- 
tention of  the  citizens  of  that  (late  to  the  illuftrious  Thomas 
Jcfferfon,  as  the  fitted  character  in  the  imion  to  fill  the  Prefi- 
dent's  chair,  and  proceeds  to  enumerate  the  various  preteniions 
of  that  gentleman.  They  are, 

I  ft.   His  merits  as  z  philofopher. 

2d.  As  a.  republican. 

gd.    A.O  *  friend  to  the  civil  and  religious  rights  of  mankind. 

4th.  As  a  citizen  who  was  in  favor  of  the  prefent  federal 
government,  but  wimed  for  amendments. 

5th.  As  an  enthufiaftic  admirer  of  the  French  Revolution, 
without  however  furrenderingjihe  independency  and  felf-govern- 
ment  of  America. 

6th.  As  a  citizen,  who  had  a  proper  fenfe  of  the  perfidious 
conduct  of  Britain  towards  us,  which  he  would  have  counteract- 
ed by  pacific  meafures,  and  meafures  more  advantageous  than 
thofe  which  have  taken  place. 

7th.  As  a  citizen  whofe  diplomatic  talents,  and  political  fa- 
gadty  are  not  inferior  to  his  republicanifm  and  unalterable  at- 
tachment to  liberty. 

8th.  As  poffeffing  a  fortune  no  lefs  independent  than  hfs 
principles,  and  with  a  difpofition,  continually  impelling  his  fer- 
tile genius  to  difcoveries  and  improvements  in  the  arts  and  fcien- 

ces. 

I  SHALL  not  ftop  to  confider  the  exclufive  claim  of  Virginia  to 
the  prefidency,  but  (hall  proceed  to  examine  the  pretenfions  of 
Thomas  Jefferfon,  as  the  above  detailed.  We  may  juftly  pre- 
fume  that  his  panegyrift  has  brought  forward  every  title  which 
this  candidate  pofleffes  to  the  public  favor  on  this  occafion,  and 
we  may  therefore  fafely  pronounce  that  thofe,  and  thofe  alone, 
are  the  titles  on  which  his  pretenfions  reft.  I  fhall  examine, 

i ft.  THE   merit  of  T.  Jefferfon,  as  a  philofopher. 

WHETHER  a  moral  or  a  natural  philofopher,  or  both,  is  not 
ftated  by  Hampden.  The  character  of  a  good  moral  philofo- 

348646 


(     4     ) 

phcris  certainly  a  very  refpe-Shble  one,  and  if  Mr.  Jefferfon's 
panegyriils  can  produce  any  evidence  of  his  merits  in  that  re- 
lation, I  (hall  be  happy  to  fee  them.  If  it  can  be  (hewn  that 
he  has  difapproved  of  the  cruelties  which  have  ftained  the  French 
revolution,  that  he  has  reprobated,  inftead  of  countenancing,  the 
impious  dottrives  of  Thomas  Paine,  that  he  has  been  an  advocate 
tuppence^  order  and  fubmiffion  to  the  laws,  that  he  has  never  re- 
commended in  a  public  character,  a  profligate  violation  of  pub- 
lic faith,  in  that  cafe,  his  qualities  as  a  good  mora/pHilofopher, 
would  be  valuable  ingredients  in  the  character  of  Prefident  of 
the  United  States. 

WHETHER  or  not  he  has  vindicated,  the  horrors  and  cruelties 
perpetrated  in  France,  has  been  the  advocate  of  Thomas  Paixc- 
and  the  patron  of  his  works,  has  foftered  diffentions  in  the  ad- 
miniftration  of  the  federal  government,  has  -eoanived  at  the  op- 
pofition  to  the  laws,  has  recommended  meafures  dc-ilruCuv^  Of 
the  public  credit  and  reputation,  will  hereafter  appear  by  a  re- 
view of  his  conduct,  and  by  a  reference  to  public  facts  and  do- 
cuments. 

IF  Hampden  only  intended  to  exhibit  him  in  the  character 
of  a  great  natural  philofopher,  1  am  at  a  lofs  to  difcern  in  what 
refpeCts  his  merits  as  a  natural  philofopher,  can  recommend  him 
to  the  preiidency.  It  mould  feem  that  the  a&ive,  anxious  and 
refponfiblc  ftation  of  prefident  would  illy  firit  the  calm,  retired 
and  exploring  views  of  a  'natural  philcfopherr  his  merits  might 
entitle  him  to  the  profefformip  of  a  college,  but  they  would  be 
as  incompatible  with  the  duties  of  the  pieiidency  as  with  the 
command  of  the  Weftern  army.  As  well  might  we  have 
brought  forward  the  eminent  talents  of  Rittenhoufe,  had  he 
been  living,  or  the  wonderful  genius  of  Cox,  the  great  bridge 
builder  :  indeed  the  merits  of  the  famous  equejlrum  Ricketts 
would  have  been  at  leall  as  likely  to  recommend  him  to  a  ilation, 
which  may  occafionally  require  great  military  talents. 

HAD  Hampden  juftly  appreciated  the  talents  of  this  great 
natural  philosopher,  he  would  have  continued  him  in  his  philo- 
fopliical1  retirement,  emptying  his  fertile  ge-.i  s  i-,i  difcc'vcrtes  a:  d 
improvement  in  the  < '  //  I  arts,  impaling  butterflies  and  inie£ls, 
and  contriving  turn-about  chairs,/  r  the  le-'efit  cf  his  fellow,  citi- 
zens ar.d  rna-  kind  in  general.  While  in  the  innocent  enjoyment 
of  fuch  harmlefs  occupations,  no  real  friend  to  his  peace  and  re- 
pofe,  and  to  the  welfare  of  mankind;  would  draw  this  calm  phi- 
lofopher from  fuch  ufeful  purfuits,  to  plunge  him  into  the  bufy 
and  dangerous  vortex  of  an  arduous  Ration. 

To  be  ferious,  let  us  examine  the  claim  which  his  panegyriil 
fets  up  for  him  to  the  title  of  philofofksr. 


(     5     ) 

FOR  the  proof  of  his  affertion,  he  refers  us  to  the  Notes  on 
Virvi-'-ia.  As  a  moral  philofopher,  I  do  not  recoiled  any  part 
of  that  work,  which  julliiies  the  affertion  ;  but  as  a  -natural  phi- 


lofopher, his  c^aim  is  probably  founded  on  his  ingenious 
tation  refpeding  the  primary  caufes  of  difference  between  the 
whites  and  the  blacks.  It  is  worthy  of  infcrtion,  and  will  fur- 
niih  an  accurate  idea  of  his  philofophical  fagacity.  This  phi- 
lofopherhad  once  formed  the  extravagant  project  of  ema:.cipa-' 
ti  g  all  tbd  flaws  of  fSirgi-.ia,  and  the  more  extravagant  one  of 
afterwards  '.item  off  to  fome  other  country  ;  in  page  147 

of  his  Notes  on  Virginia,  he  fays, — "  it  will  probably  be  aiked, 
"  why  not  retain  and  incorporate  the  blacks  in  this  ftate  ?  I 
"  anfwer,  deep  rooted  prejudices  entertained  by  the  whites, 
"  ten  thoufand  recolledions  by  the  blacks  of  the  i  juries  they 
"  have  fuftained,  new  provocations,  the  real  dyinSions  which 
"  n 'A 'TX.*  has  male,  and  many  other  circumflances,  will  divide 
•'  UG  into  parties  and  produce  convulfions,  which  will  never  end 
"  but  in  the  extermination  of  the  o  :e  or  tic  other  race.  To  thefe 
"  objections,  which  are  political^  may  be  added  others,  which 
"  are  phvfical  ar.d  moral.  The  firft  difference  which  ilrikes  us 
"  is  that  of  colour  ;  whether  the  black  of  the  negro  refidcs  in 
"  the  reticular  membrane  between  the  fkin  and  the  fcarf  ikin, 
"  or  in  the  fcraf  ihiu  ilfelf,  whether  it  proceeds  frcru  the  colour 
"  of  _the  blood,  or  the  colour  of  the  bile,  or  from  that  of  fome 
"  other  fecr>:!i  v  isjixaatq  '^(it:.ire^  and  is  as  real  as 

"  if  its  feat  aud  caule  \verc  better  known  to  us.  And  is  this  dif- 
"  fere xce  of  no  importance  ?  Is  it  not  the  foundation  of  a  greater 
"  or  a  lefs  (hare  of  beauty  in  the  two  races  ?  Are  not  the  fine 
*'  mixtures  of  reel  ar-d  \vliite,  the  exprcfliens  of  every  paffionby 
'*  greater  or  lefs  fuffuilon  of  colour  in  the  one,  preferable  to  that 
"  eternal  monotony  ".:ns  in  the  countenances,  that  im- 

"  moveable  veil  of  black  which  covevs  ail  the  emotions  of  the 
«'  olher  race  ?  Add  to  thefe,  flowing  hair,  a  more  elegant  iym- 
"  metry  of  fonn,  their  own  judgment  in  favor  of  the  whites, 
"  declared  by  their  preference  of  them  as  uniformly  as  is  the 
"  preference  of  the  ora;t  ou!a"g  for  the  t  T  thofc  of 

*'  his  f.'V.>';fpcc!cs.  Befldcs  thofe  of  colour,  figure  and  hair,  there 
**  are  other  pi:  \&ious  proving  a  of  race;  th  y 

"  have  lefs  hair  on  the  fp c  v/f  lefs  ly  the  L'< 

**  and  more  by  ths  glare's  oj  the  A-/;;,  which  gives  them  a  very 
"  Jlrong  and difagrcrabfe  odo?r.  They  are  more  tolerant  of  heat, 
"  and  lefs  fo  of  cold,  than  the  whites,  perhaps  owing  to  a  diffe- 
"  re.ice  offiruci  -jre  i"i  tbepnlm^  s  ;  they  are  more  ar- 

"  dent  afler  their  female  •  their  griefs  are  traniient  ;  in  general 
"  their  exiilence  appears  to  participate  more  of  fenfation  than 
"  re^edion.  They  are  in  reafoaxauch  inferior  to  the  whites.  It 
"  is  not  againit  experience  to  iuppofc  tliat  different  fpecies  of  the 


"fame  genus,  or  varieties  of  tie  fame  fpecles,  may  poffefs  different 
«*  qualifications.  Will  not  a  lover  of  natural  In/lory,  then,  one 
*«  who  views  the  gradations  in  all  the  races  of  animals,  with  the 
"  eye  of  philofophy,  excufe  an  effort  to  keep  thofe  in  the  depart- 
"  ment  of  man  as  dijlintt  as  nature  has  formed  them  ;  this  unfor- 
"  tunatc  difference  cf  colour,  and  perhaps  of  faculty,  is  a  po  wer- 
"/,</  oljlacle  to  tie  emancipation  of  thefe  people.  Many  of  their 
"  advocates  while  they  wifh  to  vindicate  the  liberty  of  human 
"  r.ati-re  are  anxious  alfo  toprfferve  Its  dignity  and  beauty.  Some 
"  of  thefe,  embarraffc-d  by  the  queftion,  what  further  is  to  be 
"  done  with  them,  join  themfelves  in  oppofition  with  thofe  who 
'*  are  aSttatfd  by  fordid  avarice  only.  Among  the  Romans, 
"  emancipation  required  but  one  effort  :  the  flave  when  made 
"  free  might  mix  without  Jlaw&g  the  blood  of  his  majler,  but  with 
*'  us,  afecwdis  necsjjary,  unknown  to  hi/lory  ;  when  freed,  he  is 
"  to  be  removed  beyond  the  reach  of  mixture." 

A  FEW  comments  on  the  foregoing  very  ridiculous  and  ela- 
borate attempt  to  prove  that  the  negroes  are  an  inferior  race  of 
animals,  will  place  in  a  juft  light  the  philofophicdl  merits  of  the 
author  :    This   paflage  has  been  felecled,  becaufe   it  is  among 
thofe  which  have  been  moft  admired  by  the  author's  friends. 

Firft,  we  obferve  an  affe6ted  anxiety  to  emancipate  the  ne- 
groes of  Virginia,  why  ?  "  in  order  to  vindicate  the  liberty  of 
tlie  human  race  ;"  but  this  commendable  zeal  prefently  yields 
to  a  more  intereiting  anxiety  "  to  preferve  the  beauty  of  the  hu- 
man race." 

To  extricate  himfelf  from  the  embarraffment  into  which  he 
is  thrown  by  the  conflicting  defires  of  "  vindicating  the  liberty 
of  the  human  race,"  and  "  preierving  its  beauty,"  he  hits  on 
the  notable  expedient  of  emancipating  all  the  flaves  of  Vir- 
ginia, and  then  iriftantly  /hipping  them  off,  like  a  herd  of  Hack 
cattle,  the  Lord  knows  where.  The  delire  of  preferring  the 
beauty  of  the  human  race  predominates,  however,  in  the  mind 
of  our  phiiofopher  ;  for  notwithstanding  the  flaves  are  to  enjoy 
a  momentary  freedom,  they  are  fuddenly  after  to  be  feized, 
bound,  packed  on  board  veflels,  and  againit  their  confent  ex- 
ported to  foine  lefs  friendly  regions,  where  they  would  be  ail 
murdered  or  reduced  to  a  more  wretched  ftate  of  fiavery, — 
Such  are  the  noble  and  enlarged  views  of  phi! of  opine  at  politicians  ! 
But  forne  j unification  muft  be  given  for  the  latter  part  of  this 
merciful  project :  It  was  neceflary  therefore  to  prove  that  the 
blacks,  (whofc  emancipation  was  requifite  to  vindicate  the  li- 
bcity  of  thf  human  racc^  were  not  in  fa£t  of  the  human  ract, 
for  this  muft  be  the  author's  meaning,  if  there  be  any  meaning 
in  his  work  ;  the  idea  of  two  or  more  human  races,  a  black  hu 


(     7     ) 

man  race,  and  a  white  human  race,  being  too  abfurd  even  for 
him  to  have  fuggefted  ;  it  is  true,  his  exprefiions  arc  fo  vague 
and  contradictory,  that  it  is  difficult  to  ascertain  very  precifely 
liis  meaning  ;  but  taking  the  whole  together,  it  refults  in  this, 
that  the  blacks  are  a  peculiar  race  of  animals  below  man  and 
above  the  oran  outang,  a  kind  of  tertium  quid,  a  higher  kind  of 
brute,  hitherto  undefcribed.  I  am  at  a  lofs  to  annex  any  other 
refult  to  the  following  exprefiions  and  obfervations,  viz.  "  The 
real  diftindtions  which  nature  has  made" — a  difference  in  the 
two  races" — comparing  the  preference  which  the  blacks  have 
for  the  whites  "  to  the  preference  of  the  oran  outang  for  the  black 
women" — fecreting  lefs  by  the  kidnies,  and  more  by  the  glands 
of  the  fkin  than  the  whites— difference  of  ftrufture  in  the  pul- 
monary apparatus — being  in  reafon  much  inferior  to  the  whites 
— different  fpecies  of  the  fame  genus,  or  varieties  of  the  fame 
fpecie?  —  their  exiftence  participating  more  offenjttion  than  re- 
flection— gradations  in  the  different  races  of  animals,"  £c. 

THE  confufion  of  ideas  which  pervaded  the  underftanding  of 
our  author  through  the  whole  of  this  very  ingenious  and  learn- 
ed differtation  mud  be  manifeft.  At  one  moment  he  is  anxi- 
ous to  emancipate  the  blacks,  to  vindicate  the  liberty  of  the  hu- 
man race — at  another,  he  difcovers  that  the  blacks  are  of  a  dif- 
ferent race  from  the  human  race,  and  therefore  when  emancipat- 
ed, muft  be  inftantly  removed  beyond  the  reach  of  mixture,  leaft 
he  (or  flic)  mould  jlai.i.  the  blood  of  his  (or  her)  matter;  not 
recollecting  what,  from  his  fituation  and  other  circumllances,  he 
ought  to  have  recolle&ed — that  this  mixture  may  take  place 
whih  the  negro  remains  in  flavery  :  he  muft  have  feen  all  a- 
round  him  fufficient  marks  of  this  Jlaixing  of  blood  to  have  been 
convinced  that  retaining  them  in  flavery  would  not  prevent  it  ; 
he  muft  have  been  fatisfied  that  the  mixture  would  not  be  the 
lefs  degrading  from  the  emancipated  ft  ate  of  the  black.  At  a- 
nother  moment  he  difcovers  that  the  blacks  are  indeed  a  part  of 
the  human  race,  but  then  they  are  a  different  fpecies  of  the  fame 
genus,  or  they  and  the  whites  conftitute  varieties  of  the  fame 
fpecies.  In  one  place  he  afferts  with  confidence  "  that  they 
are  vi  reafon  much  i  fcrior  to  the  whites  ;"  in  another,  he  feems 
to  doubt  it  ;  "  this  difference  of  colour,  and  perhaps  of  fatui- 
ty ;"  to  juftify  the  emancipation  of  the  blacks,  they  are  made  a 
part  of  the  h:iman  race;  to  juftify  their  tranfportation  they  arc 
clafftd  with  the  brutes. 

But  the  moll  extraordinary  of  all  the  felf  contradictions  of 
this  philofopher  is  found  in  a  Letter  written,  while  fecretary  o£ 
flate,  to  a  Negro  named  Benjamin  BanneJser,  which  letter,  liar- 
ing  a  clofe  relatioa  to  this  fubjecl',  may  very  properly  be  here 
introduced. 


We  have  fecn  from  the  above  quotation,  that  our  author 
was  decidedly  of  opinion— ill,  ?  hat  there  was  a  Jixed  difference 
in.naiure  between  the  whites  and  blacks — :d,  That  this  arnount- 


a;  j,.'J..;r.Iy  not  produced 'by  their  cm-uli- 

tion,  but  by  tii'.. 

THE  negro  Benjamin  was  the  reputed  author  of  an  Almanac, 
which  was  either  dedicated  to,  or  lent,  with  fome  compi 
tary  epiftle,  to  his  brother  author,  our  phiiofopher,  whofe  phi- 
lofophy  was  of  fo  pliant  a  quality,  that,  inilantly  forgetting  all 
his  learned  difcoveries  on  the  fkin  and  fcarf  fkin  and  kiduies  cf 
the  unfavcry  Africans,  he  fat  down  and  wrote  to  brother  Ben- 
jamJn  a  fraternizing  epiftle,  in  which  "he  rejoiced  to  iW!  that 
"  NATURE  -had  given  to  his  black  brethren  talents  equal  to 
"  thofe  of  other  colours,  and  that  the  appearance  of  a  want  of 
"  them,  was  owing  merely  to  the  degraded  condition  of  their  ex- 
"  iPience,  both  in  Africa  and  America.''  He  then  adds  his 
wr/tots  for  the  emancipation  of  the  negroes  in  the  United  States, 
as  fail  as  circumftances  will  admit.  Here  we  find  a  direft  and 
jlat  contradiction  to  all  his  afiertions  on  this  fubjeft  in  his  Notes  ; 
from  which  we  muft  infer,  either  that  that  work  was  compiled 
with  fo  much  inaccuracy,  and  fuch  want  of  information  or  re- 
flection, that  the  moft  trivial  chcumftance  was  fufficient  to  in- 
duce him  to  contradict  its  contents  kimfelf  ;  or  that  he  was  fo 
influenced  by  a  ridiculous  vanity,  fo  tickled  by  a  filly  compliment 
from  an  "  unfavory  animal  of  an  inferior  race"  as  wilfully  and 
publicly  to  contradict,  without  any  fhame  or  regard  to  public 
decency,  his  former  affertions,  flill  believing  them  to  be  well 
founded.  His  panegyrift  may  choofe  from  the  above  alterna- 
tives, that  which  may  be  the  ieaii  injurious  to  his  friend.  He 
will  probably  attempt  to  vindicate  the  phiiofopher  by  introduc- 
ing his  candor  which  led  him  to  recant  an  error.  The  wonder- 
ful production  of  Brother  Benjamin,  he  will  fay,  had  convinc- 
ed him  of  the  untruth  of  his  former  doftrine.  But  this  apol- 
ogy will  not  do  ;  becaufe  the  Notes  on  Virginia  prove,  that  our 
phiiofopher  had  feen  the  reputed  works  of  other  bloc&s,  at  lea'fl 
canal  in  merit  to  Brother  BenjaminJ3.  and  had  fuggeited,  that 
they  were  the  production  of  fome  white  perfon,  falfely  attri- 
buted to  the  negroes.  He  had  fully  conlidered  and  difcufied 
this  fubje&  :  this  appears  from  the  preceding  quotation  ;  but 
to  leave  no  room  for  doubt  on  this  point,  a  rurther  quotation 
mall  be  inferted.  Our  author,  in  his  great  zeal  to  fupport  his 
doctrine  of  the  inferiority  of  the  race  cf'lhe  Hacks,  proceeds  thus 
to  the  proof:  "  They  are  in  reafon  much  Inferior  to  the  whites  ; 


(     9     ) 

"  as,  I  think,  one  could  fcarcely  be  found  capable  of  tracing 
"  and  comprehending  the  investigations  of  Euclid  ;  in  imagi- 
"  nation,  they  are  dull,  taftelefs  and  anomalous.     Many  have 
"  been  brought  up  to  the  handicraft  arts  ;  fome  have  been  li- 
"  berally  educated  ;  and  all  (in  America)  have  lived  in  coun- 
"  tries  where  the  arts  and  fciences  are  cultivated  to  a  confidera- 
"  ble  degree,  and  h?.d  before  their  eyes  iamples  of  the  bed 
"  works  from  abroad.      The  Indians,  with  no  advantages  of 
il  this  kind,  will  often  carve  figures  on  their  pipes,  not  defti- 
"  tute  of  dtTigii  and  merit  ;  they  will  crayon  out  an  animal,  a 
"  plant,  or  a  country,  fo  as  to  prove  the  exiftence  of  a  germ 
"  in  their  minds,  which  only  wants  cultivation.     They  afton- 
«<  ifli  you  with  ftrokes  of  the  moil  fublime  oratory,  fuch  as 
<*  prove  their  reafon  and  fentiment  ftrong,  their  imagination 
**  glowing  and  elevated  ;    but  never  yet  could  I  find  that  a 
«<  black  had  uttered  a  thought  above  the  level  of  plain  narra- 
te tion  —  never  fee  even  an  elementary  trait  of  painting  and 
"  fculpture.      Love  is  the  peculiar  ccilrum  of  the  poet  :  their 
"  love  is  ardent,  but  it  kindles  the  fenfe  only,  not  the  imagin- 
««  ation.      Religion,  indeed,  has  produced  a  Phillis   Wheatly, 
"  but  it  could  not  produce  a  poet.     The  compofitions  pub- 
"  lifhed  under  her  name,  are  below  the  dignity  of  criticifm* 
"  Ignatius  Sancbo  has  approached  nearer  to  merit  in  his  com- 
"  pofition  :   Though  we  admit  him  to  the  firft.  place  among 
"  thofe  of  his  own  colour,  who  have  prefented  themfelves  to 
"  the  public  judgment,  yet,  when  we  compare  him  with  the 
<c  writers  of  the  race  among  whom  he  lived,  and  particularly 
"  with  the  epiftolarly  clafs,  in  which  he  has  taken  his  own 
""  ftand,  we  are  compelled  to  enroll  him  at  the  bottom  of  the  co- 
"  lumn.     This  criticifm  fuppofes  the  letters  publifhed  under 
'*  his  name,  to  be  genuine,  and  to  have  received  amendment  from 
"   no  other  hand,  points  tuh'fh  ivo''-1d  not  bs  enfy  of  tnvr/tigation, 
(furprifmg  the  fame  reflections  did  not  occur  refpccling  Ben- 
jamin, the  almanac-maker!)   The  improvement  of  the  blacks, 
"  in  body  and  mind,  in  the^r/?  l,iftance  of  their  mixture  with  the 
'*  whites,  has  been  obferved  by  every  one,  and  preves,  that  their 
"  inferiority  is  not  the  effeS,  merely  of  their  condition  of  life.      A' 
"  mong  the  Romans,  their  Jlaves  were  often  their  rarejl  ar- 
"  tifts;  they  excelled  too  in  fcience,  mfomuch  as  to  be  ufually 
"  employed  as  tutors  to  their  mafter's  children,     Epiftetus, 
"  Terence  and  Phcedrus  were  flaves  ;  but  they  were  of  the  race 
'*  of  'whites.     It  is  not  their  condition,  then,  but  NATURE^  'which 
«  «  has  produced  the  dif.la 


FROM  the  above  it  is  evident,  that  he  had  well  examined 
this  fubje&,  and  that  his  direft  snd  grofe  contradiction  of  all 
this  doilrine,  fo  foon  after,  fprung  principally  from  a  wi(h  to 

B 


(      '0     } 

acqin'ic  a  in;;c  popularity  with  the  free  negroes.  What  muft 
we  now  think  of  a  philofopher,  who,  in  one  publication,  af- 
it".  Is  it  to  be  " pro-vcd,  that  the  inferiority  of  the  blacks  is  not 
"  the  effeft  merely  of  their  condition  of  life,  but  a  (TiftinSion  of 
'*  nice,  produced  by  nature  ;"  and  in  another  "  that  it  is  ow- 
"  ing  merely  to  tlie  degraded  condition  of  their  exiilence."  Did 
lie  flatter  himfclf  that  his  letter  to  Banneker  would  efcapc 
publication,  and  only  be  handed  round  among  the  free  negroes, 
who  probably  never  had  read  his  Notes,  or  if  they  had,  would 
forgive  the  pail  injury,  on  account  of  the  prefent  recantation  ? 
Did  he  hope  thus  to  efcape  dttedion,  and  thus  artfully  to  ob- 
tain the  chara&er  of  a  great  and  fugacious  philofopher  with 
the  friends  of  negro  flavery,  while  he  would  be  rewarded  with 
jilaudits  of  the  abolition  focieties  and  free  negroes? — What 
(hall  we  think  of  a  furetary  of  Jlate  thus  frgterntving  with  ne- 
groes, writing  them  complimentary  epiflles,  {tiling  thetn  his 
black  brethren,  congratulating  them  on  the  evidences  of  their 
gtnius,  and  affuring  them  of  his  good  wilhes  for  their  fpeedy 
emancipation  ;  what  mull  the  citizens  of  the  fouthern  Jlates, 
particularly,  whofe  flaws  are  guaranteed  to  them  as  their  pro- 
perty by  the  conftitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States,  think 
of 'a  fecretary  of  the  United  States,  (whofe  peculiar  duty  it  was  to 
watch  over  the  interefts  of  every  part  of  the  Union,)  who,  at 
the  hazard  of  the  primary  interefts  of  thofe  Hates,  promulgates 
his  approbation  of  a  fpeedy  emancipation  of  their  flaves  ? — 
What  will  they  think  of  fuch  a  candidate  for  the  office  of  pre- 
lident  of  the  United  States  r — What  will  they  fay  to  the  Elec- 
tors of  the  fouthern  Jiates  who  (hall  be  fo  entirely  regardlefs  of  the 
Interefts  and  future  peace  and  tranquillity  of  their  country  as  to  vote 
for  fuch  a  perfon  ?  But  this  fubjedl,  from  its  importance,  re- 
quires a  further  confideration. 

THOMAS  JEFFERSON,  fecretary  of  ftate  of  the  United 
Slates,  in  his  letter  to  the  negro  Banneker,  acknowledges  him- 
felf  converted  from  all  his  former  opinions,  refpecting  the  infe- 
riority of  the  black  race,  and  declares  himfelf  convinced  "  that 
"  nature\a&  given  to  his  black  brethren  talents  equal  to  thofe  of 
**  ether  colours,  and  that  the  appearance  of  a  want  of  them  is 
*'  owing  merely  to  the  degraded  condition  of  their  exiilence  both 
"  in  Africa  and  America"  He  concludes  his  fraternizing  epif- 
tle  with  thefe  words,  "  I  can  add  with  truth,  that  nobody 
"  wi/l'-es  more  ardently  to  fee  a  good  fyftem  commenced  for 
"  ralfirig  the  condition  both  of  their  body  and  mind  to  iu hat  it 
"  ought  to  be,  as  fcjl  as  the  imbecility  of  their  prefent  exiilence 
**  and  other  clrcumftances  which  cannot  be  neglected,  will  ad- 
mit ! "  Notwithstanding  the  caution  and  cunning  with  which 
the  latter  lenience  is  worded,  to  admit  of  a  double  interpreta- 


lion,  if  neceflary,  it  cannot  be  denied  that,  taking  the  whole 
letter  together,  it  meant  to  exprcfs  to  the  negro,  Benjamin, 
an  ardent  wifli  to  fee  an  early  fyftera  of  emancipation  in  the 
fouthcrn  itates  ;  he  had  juft  fuid,  that  nature  had  given  to  his 
ILicL-  brethren  talents  erjual  to  thofc  of  the  whites,  end  th.it  the 
appearance  of  a  want  of  thorn  was  owing  merer;  f:o  th<  ir  ffcgrr.d- 
<.',/  condition  ;  he  immediately  adds  bit  urJ:nt  ^-/'Jh  for  a  good 
fyftem  for  ra'[fii'.g  the  condition  both  of  their  ln<!y  and  r::(nd  to 
w'.>:'t  if  ou^ht  ID  be,  that  is,  in  plain  Englifh,  "  from  the  de- 
graded condition  of  flavery  to  a  ftate  of  freedom.'1  The  qua- 
lification fubjoined,  viz.  "  As  fait  as  the  imbecility  of  their 
"  prefent  exiilence,  and  olhar  circttmjlanccs  which  cannot  be 
"  negle&ed,  will  admit,"  was  introduced  as  an  artfid  falvo, 
not  too  far  to  commit  himfelf  ;  behind  thefe  equivocal  expref- 
fions  he  thought  himfelf  flickered  from  an  attack  in  the  fouth- 
cr'n  Itates  ;  lie  might,  if  puflied,  conftrue  them  into  an  opini- 
on,  that  for  centuries  to  come,  emancipation  would  be  impo- 
litic and  dangerous,  becaufe  other  clrcumftances  v/ou!d  not  ji'i- 
tify  the  meaiure.  But  this  is  certain,  that  had  he  viewed  the 
meafure  of  emancipation  as  a  dangerous  one,  either  he  would 
have  difcountenanced  it,  or  at  leall,  on  fo  delicate  a  fubjeft, 
kept  filent.  Why  fuch  an  anfwer  to  the  negro's  lette*  ?  Why 
not  confine  his  anfwer  merely  to  the  almanac,  and  to  the  ufual 
compliment  on  fuch  an  occalion  ?  Why  make  a  parade  of  his 
opinion,  by  extolling  the  natural  genius  of  the  blacks,  remind- 
ing them  of  their  degraded  condition  and  expreffing  a  wim  to 
fee  it  changed  ?  Either  hv  v;as  a  friend  to  emancipation,  or  he 
was  not:  if  the  former,  then  the  qualification  refpe-rHngo/^r  cir* 
cuirjlances  was  abfurd  and  unmeaning  ;  if  the  latter,  then  the  en- 
comiums on  the  talents  of  the  blacks,  and  the  ardent  \vifh  for 
.heir  releafe  from  their  degraded  condition,  were  equally  abfurd. 
in,  he  tells  Bauneker,  ai:d  througli  him  all  the  negroes  in 
America,  "  I  am  fatisrlcd  that  your  natural  iaiztils  are  equal  to 
"  thofe  of  the  whites,  and  that  the  appearance  of  a  wii'.t.  i.f 
"  them  in  you  is  owing  merely  to  the  degraded  condition  of  your 
exiitence  ;"  now  what  does  he  mean  by  adding,  "  I  wifli  to 
*'  fee  you  emancipated,  as  f(^on  as  the  imbecility  of  yoi/r  pr-  - 
"  font  exiftence  will  admit  i1"  If  the  appearance  of  their  want 
of  talents  was  owing  merely  to  their  condition,  the  iboner  they 
emerged  from  that  condition  the  better  ;  if  their  imbecility  wris 
produced  folely  by  their  condition,  that  imbecility  would  ceaie 
the  moment  they  were  emancipated  ;  what  kind  of  reafbtiing 
is  it,  to  charge  their  imbecility  altogether  to  their  condition, 
and  yet  to  expecl  an  amelioration  of  their  reafon  antecedently 
to  their  change  of  condition  ?  It  is  no  better  than  the  blunder 
of  the  Irijkman,  who  would  not  fuffer  his  fon  to  go  into  the 
water,  until  he  could  fvvim.  J  Accordiajr  to  our  author's  mode 


(       12       ) 

of  reafoning,  the  negroes  could  never  be  emancipated,  his  ar- 
dent wifh  could  never  be  gratified  ;  the  ilavery  of  the  negroes 
he  fays  is  the  fole  cnufe  of  their  imbecility  ;  but  he  immediately 
.adds,  they  mull  remain  in  flavery  'till  their  minds  are  enlight- 
ened. How  are  they  to  acquire  this  neceffary  pre-requifite  to 
emancipation,  when,  according  to  his  doctrine,  that  pre-re- 
quifite  can  only  be  obtained  after  emancipation  ?  Here  is  fuch 
a  jumble  of  ideas,  fuch  a  confounding  of  caufe  vn&effeB  in  this 
letter,  that  the  production  of  it  by  a  man  of  common  under- 
ftanding  can  only  be  accounted  for  by  afcribing  it  to  a  pitiful 
graip  at  popularity  from  a  clafs  which  he  had  defpifed,  and  to 
an  ardent  wifh  for  the  emancipation  of  the  fouthern  negroes, 
fhrouded  in  the  cautions  and  ambiguous  language  of  one,  who 
thought  the  times  not  yet  ripe  enough  for  a  full  difclofure  of 
his  dangerous  views. — Another  qualification  in  his  letter  re- 
fers ^to  "  clher  circumjlanccs )  \\hich  cannot  be  neglected." 
What  circumflances  had  he  in  view,  to  prevent  the  immedi- 
ate emancipation  of  the  blacks  ?  Does  he  allude  to  the  dif- 
ficulties which  would  oppofe  his  franfportation  fcheme  ?  Sure- 
ly the  negroes  would  not  thank  him  for  their  liberty  on 
frch  terms  ;  but  in  his  Notes  on  Virginia  he  is  decidedly  of 

.inion^that  the  negroes  of  the  United  States,  when  freed, 
muil  be  removed  beyond  the  reach  of  mixture  ;  rather  a  harfh 
treatment  for  his  black  brethren  !  Whence  proceeds  this  right 
of  transportation  (without  a  crime  or  conviction)  our  phi- 
Jofopher  has  not  informed  us,  and  on  what  pretext  of  lav/  or 
juflice,  free. Tien,  not  even  charged  with  any  offence,  are  to 
be  (hipped  oil,  like  cattle,  I  am  unable  to  difcover :  had  he 
propoled  {hipping  them  off,  while  flaves,  there  would  be 
more  fenfe  in  the  project  ;  but  firft  to  emancipate  and  inveft 
them  with  all  the  rights  of  free  citizens,  and  then  forth- 
with to  treat  them  as  flaves  and  cattle,  is  altogether  unintel- 
ligibly 

PERHAPS  the  project  was,  to  make  it  a  preliminary  con- 
dition Jine  qua  non  with  the  Africa»s,  that  they  mould  be 
free,  fubjeft  to  immediate  transportation  :  but  when  free,  it 
is  doubtful  how  many  of  them  would  confider  themfelves 
bound  by  fuch  a  condition;  indeed  it  is  queflionable  whether 
many  of  them  would  accept  their  freedom  on  fuch  terms. 
Bui  waving  thefe  difficulties,  how  impolitic  would  it  not  be 
to  banifh  from  the  country  feveral  hundred  thoufand  of  our 
black  brethren,  to  •whom  nature  has  given  talents  equal  to  our 
own,  and  who,  in  fpite  of  their  monotonous  •}-  colour  and  of- 
fenfive  fecretions  (circumflances  common  to  thoufands  of  o- 
ther  colours)  might  become  very  ufeful  citizens,  and,  ac- 
cording to  the  fecretary's  letter,  rank  with  the  whites  in 

t  Wiu  ever  heard,  bcU-re  Mr.  Je.Terf  m's  time,  of  the  menotQtiy  of  olours  ? 


(     '3     ) 

point  of  genius  and  merit,  at  the  very  Jnftant  of  their  emanci- 
pation.— If  the  fecretary  of  State  meant  in  his  letter  to  al- 
lude to  his  (hipping  project  by  the  words  "  other  circUn> 
fiances/'  it  would  have  been  but  candid  in  him  to  have  un- 
folded to  his  black  brethren  the  whole  extent  of  his  views, 
that  they  might  be  fully  apprifed  of  the  terms  on  which  they 
had  his  ardent  wifhes  for  emancipation.  Having  omitted  fo 
eiFential  a  part  of  the  plan,  it  is  to  be  prefumed,  that  he  has 
abandoned  it,  and  now  wifhes  for  their  emancipation  as  f aft  as 
other  circumjlances  will  allow  it  to  be  accompliihtd  ;  that  is,  as 
foon  as  he  mall  find  it  convenient  to  difpofe  of  his  own,  and 
as  foon  as  the  meafures  which  'are  now  puriuing  for  that  pur- 
pofe  in  feveral  of  the  ftates,  even  in  fome  of  the  fouthern  Hates, 
and  the  principles  which  have  been  tranfplanted  from  the 
French  colonies  into  America,  and  his  countenance  as  Preji- 
dent  of  the  United  States,  (hall  combine  to  make  the  mea- 
fure  appear  practicable  in  the  eyes  of  its  promoters. 

IT  appears  almoft  incredible  (and  could  not  be  credited  had 
we  not  the  facts  before  our  eyes)  that  the  fame  Thomas  Jef- 
ferfon,  who  not  many  years  ago  published  to  the  world  his  opin- 
ion, "  that  there  were  powerful  obftacles  to  the  emancipation 
"  of  the  blacks,  becauie  deep  rooted  prejudices  entertained 
"  by  the  whites,  ten  thoufand  recollections  by  the  blacks  of 
"  the  I  juries  they  have  fuilained,  new  provocations,  the  real 
"  diftindtions  which  nature  has  made,  and  many  other  circum- 
"  ftances,  will  divide  us  into  parties  and  produce  convuifions 
**  which  will  never  end  but  in  the  extermination  of  the  one  or  the 
"  other  race,"  mould  have  recently  declared  his  ardent  <wiflj  for 
fuch  emancipation,  at  the  ri(k  of  all  the  horrid  confequences 
which  he  had  himfelf  fo  ilrongly  depicted. 

IF  fuch  a  wonderful  change  h?.s  been  wrought  in  his  mind, 
to  what  are  we  to  impute  it  ?  I  can  find  no  other  clue  to  it 
than  the  deluiive  and  vifionary  principles  which  he  has  imbibed 
on  that  fubject  by  his  refidence  in  France.  It  is  to  be  remark- 
ed that  he  publifhed  his  notes  on  Virginia,  after  fpending  the 
greateft  part  of  his  life  in  Virginia,  among  Negroe  holders  and 
Negroes,  and  at  a  period  when  he  muit  be  prefumed  to  be  pret- 
ty well  acquainted  with  Negroes,  and  aware  of  the  confequences 
of  their  emancipation  ;  he  wrote  his  letter  to  Banneker,  the 
Negro,y#?;z  after  his  return  from  Francs. 

IF  his  fentiments  on  this  fubject  were  not  changed  when 
he  wrote  to  the  Negro,  then  his  letter  to  him  is  a  piece  of 
grofs  hypocrify,  calculated  to  filch  a  little  popularity  from  a 
few  free  Negroes,  and  the  friends  of  emancipation,  at  the  ex- 
pence  of  his  own  character  and  of  the  peace  of  his  country. 


(     H     ) 

WFI ETHER  the  Secretary  complied  with  the  promife  made 
in  that  letter  to  Banneker  "  of  fending  his  almanac  to  the 
great  philofopher  Coxdorcet"  as  a  teftimony  of  his  black  bro- 
ther's extraordinary  genius,  we  have  never  learnt. 

MANY  further  fimilar  illuftrations  might  be  made  of  the  ex- 
fecrctary's^i/o/o^/W  talents  from  his  notes  on  Virginia  ;  thefe 
may  for  the  prefent  fuffice.  At  a  future  opportunity,  we  may 
find  leifure  to  notice  his  very  extraordinary  penal  code,  and  his 
v/himfical  fyilem  of  retaliation,  his  wife  attempt  to  refute  the 
account  of  the  deluge,  (evidently  Hated  by  Mofes  to  be  a  miracle] 
by  a  recurrence  to  phiiofophical  and  merely  natural  principles  ; 
and  fun  dry  other  phiiofophical  abfurdities.  His  plagiary  nr^cr/ 
on  weights  and  meaf.iHs  will  be  adverted  to  under  another  head. 
AFTER  thefe  fpecimens  of  his  talents,  we  may  fafely  venture 
to  withhold  from  1  homas  Jeflerfon  the  title  of  philofopher. 

BUT  we  mould  incur  no  danger  in  yielding  to  his  claim  in 
the  fulleft  extent,  becaufe  it  mull  be  obvious  to  men  of  the 
fmalleft  experience  in  public  life,  that  of  all  beings,  a  philofo- 
pher, makes  the  worft  politician;  that  if  any  one  circumftance 
more  than  another,  could  difqualify  Mr.  Jefferfon  for  the  Prefi- 
dency,  it  would  be  the  charge  of  his  being  a  philofopher.  Not 
believing  him  to  poifefs  any  thing  more  than  the  majk  of  philo- 
fophy,  my  objection  to  his  election  would  certainly  not  reft  on 
that  ground  ;  but  as  there  may  be  fume,  who,  having  read  his 
works  fuperficially,  may  have  been  deceived  by  that  character, 
which  is  fometimes  acquired,  becaufe  no  one  has  been  at  the 
trouble  to  Scrutinize  and  ftrip  it  of  its  borrowed  garb,  to  them 
I  repeat  that,  admitting  him  to  be  a  moll  learne^l  philofopher, 
fuch  a  character  alone  creates  his  difqualification  for  the  Preii- 
dency. 

IN  turning  over  the  page  of  hiilory,  we  find  it  teeming  with 
evidences  of  the  ignorance  and  rmfinanagemerit  of  phiiofophical 
politicians.  The  great  l^ocke  was  employed  to  frame  a  conili- 
tution  for  Carolina  ;  but  it  abounded  fo  much  with  regulations, 
inapplicable  to  the  Hate  of  things  for  which  it  was  dtfigned,  fo 
full  of  theoretic  whimfie3t  that  it  was  foon  thrown  afide.  Con- 
dorcet,  a  particular  friend  of  our  American  philofcpher,  was  a 
great  French  philofopher  ;  his  conftitution,  propofed  in  1793, 
contains  more  abfurdities  than  were  ever  before  piled  up  in  any 
fyilem  of  Government  ;  it  was  fo  radically  defective  that  its 
operation  was  never  even  attempted  ;  -j-  Condorcet's  political 

t  Hear  what  Boi/iv  d'Anrla*  fays  of  the  Constitution  of  Condorcet,  a  brother  laborer 
in  Philcf^phy  and  PoHih't  of  Thomas  Jeffcri'm  :  meditated  aim'iift.  intrigue  and  am- 
bition, conceived  hi  the  boi  )iii  of  vice,  rhat  Conllitvition  is  nothing:  more  than  the  /;/.?*- 
e nitration  of  all_  the  element!,  rf  difurder,  and  the  or^aniz  itiun  of  anarchy.  AVIiat  ;n- 
dcccl  nnift  we  think  ofa  Corltitution,  which  organizes  tht:  partial  infurrediim  of  powers, 
independent  of  the  conltiaited  authorities  and  legalizes  the  reii>;n  of  plunder  and  ter- 
ror." Compare  this,  Americans,  with  the  principles  and  practice  of  the  Democratic 
Societies  auel'the  otlicr  iiipportcrs  of  Thomas  Jcff'tj  fun  !  .' 


{     '5     ) 

follies,  and  the  wretched  termination  of  his  career  are  well 
known  ;  he  had  philoibphy  enough  to  know  how  to  raife  a 
ftorm,  but  not  enough  to  avert  its  effects.  The  affairs  of  France 
have  fince  been  more  ably  conducted  (except  during  the  fliort 
ariftocracy  of  Robefpierre)  by  men  who  are  good  politicians, 
but  fortunately  for  France,  -not  pbilofophers. 

RITTENHOUSE  was  a  great  philofopher,  but  the  only  proof 
we  have  had  of  his  political  talents  was  his  fuffering  himfelf  to 
be  wheedled  into  the  Prcjidency  of  the  Democratic  Society  of  Phi- 
ladelphia, a  fociety  with  which  he  was  even  afhamed  to  affociate, 
tho'  cajoled  and  flattered  into  the  loan  of  his  name.  Many  other 
inflances  might  be  adduced. 

THE  charafteriftic  traits  of  a  philofopher,  when  he  turns  po- 
litician, are,  timidity,  whimficalnefs,  a  difpofition  to  reafon  from 
certain  principles,  and  not  from  the  true  nature  of  man ;  a  prone- 
nefs  to  predicate  all  his  meafures  on  certain  abftradl  theories, 
formed  in  the  recefs  of  his  cabinet,  and  not  on  the  exifting  Hate 
of  things  and  circumllances  ;  an  inertnefs  of  mind,  as  applied 
to  governmental  policy,  a  wavering  of  difpofition  when  great 
and  fudden  emergencies  demand  promptnefs  of  decifion  and 
energy  of  action.  If  the  laws  are  oppofcd  and  infurreclion  raifes 
its  creft,  the  infurgents  will  always  calculate  on  the  weaknefs 
and  indecifion  of  the  executive  (if  a  philofopher)  and  they  will 
be  juftified  in  their  calculations,  for  he  will  hefitate  till  all  is  loft  ; 
he  will  be  wandering  in  the  labyrinths  of  philofophical  {pecula- 
tions, moralizing  on  the  fin  of  fpilling  human  blood,  and  foolifh- 
ly  perfuading  himfelf  that  mankind  can  always  be  reclaimed  and 
brought  back  to  their  duty  by  ivholcfome  advice.  His  mind 
will  be  conilantly  attracted  to  his  favorite  purfuits  ;  and  his  pre- 
fidentid  duties,  will,  of  courfe,  be  pcflponed  to  more  pleaiing 
avocations. 

LET  us  fuppofe  one  of  thefe  exploring  and  profound  philo- 
fophers  elected  Prefident  of  the  United  States,  and  a  foreign 
miniller,  on  his  firft  introduction  into  his  cabinet,  furprifing 
him  in  the  a£t  of  infpecting  tivtjkinand  the  fcarfjkin  of  a  black 
and  a  white  pig,  in  order  to  difcover  the  caufes  of  difference 
which  nature  has  created  in  their  colour,  or  with  the  fame  view 
anatomizing  the  kidnies  and  glands  of  a  Negro  to  afcertain  the 
nature  of  his  fecrettons  ?  Would  not  the  miniftcr's  firft  obferva- 
tion  be.  that  the  philofopher  would  be  much  better  employed 
in  his  retirement  at  home,  and  his  fecond,  that  fuch  a  Prefident 
would  furmih  excellent  materials  for  him  to  make  ufe  of. 

WHAT  refpecl  would  the  officers  of  government  entertain  for 
a  prtii  Jent,  whom  they  fnould  find,  on  waiting  on  him  for  in- 
ilruclLns,  buiily  engaged  in  impaling  a  butterfly  or  contriving 


with  afliduous  perfeverance  an  f  eafy  ckalr  of  new  conftru6tion  ? 
Would  not  an  attention  to  thefe  littlenefles  make  him  the  ridi- 
cule of  the  world  ?  The  great  WASHINGTON  was,  thank 
God,  no  philofopher  ;  had  he  been  one,  we  mould  never  have 
feen  his  great  military  exploits  ;  we  mould  never  have  profpered 
under  his  wife  adminiftration.  There  is  another  chara&eriftic 
trait  in  philofophers  highly  dangerous,  namely,  their  extreme  o- 
pennefs  tofattery  ;  a  flatterer  will  be  always  fure  to  gain  a  philo- 
fopher's  affe&ions  ;  a  philofophical  prefident  will  be  confequent- 
ly  moil  influenced  by  that  nation  which  flatters  moft  ;  which  that 
is,  need  not  be  mentioned  :  if  their  agents  do  not  fail  in  this 
national  qualification,  fuch  a  prefident  will  be  their  moft  devoted 
fervant  :  he  will  alfo  be  perpetually  furrounded  by  a  fwarm  of 
domeftic  flatterers  ;  and  as  they  are  generally  the  bafeft  of  cha- 
raclers,  the  companions  he  will  be  attached  to,  and  the  meafures 
they  will  promote,  may  without  difficulty  be  predicted. 

BUT,  although  I  have  thus  denied  to  Mr.  Jefferfon  the  title 
of  ^L  real  philofopher  9  I  am  ready  to  allow  that  he  pofleffes  the 
inferior  characterises,  and  the  externals  of  philofophy.  By  one, 
ambitious  of  pafling  with  the  world  for  a  philofopher,  the  firft 
were  eafily  acquired,  the  laft  as  eafily  affumed.  The  inferior 
chara&eriftics,  as  applied  to  the  fcience  of  politics,  are  a  want  of 
fteadinefs,  a  conliitutional  indecifion  and  verfatility,  vifionary, 
wild  and  fpeculative  fyftcms,  and  various  other  defective  features, 
which  have  been  already  pourtrayed — Indeed  fo  unfettled  is  the 
mind  of  a  would  le  philofopher,  fo  capricious  and  verfatile  are 
the  principles  of  thefe  pkilijfcphical  mimics,  that  they  attempt  to 
reconcile  the  moft  irreconcilable  theories,  and  to  juftify  the  moft 
inconfiftent  acls  by  the  fame  ftandard.  Thus  you  will  find  thefe 
pretenders  to  philofophy,  at  one  moment,  coolly  juftifying  the 
moft  atrocious  and  janguinary  cruelties,  provided  they  are  means 
to  a  certain  favorite  end ;  at  another,  cautiouily  difliiading  from 
vigorous,  tho'  neceffary  meafures,  left  they  might  fatally  iifue 
in  the  fiiedding  of  human  blood.  Condorcet  and  Br'iffot  were, 
like  Jeffcrfon,  reputed  philofophers  ;  they  fct  up  certain  wild 
and  mifchievous  theories  of  government  ;  of  courfe,  followed 
the  emancipation  of  the  negroes  in  the  French  Weft-Indies,  and, 
of  courfe,  the  maffacre  of  the  whites,  and  the  defolation  of  the 
colonies  :  this  was  repreiented  to  them,  by  a  deputation  from 
the  colonies,  warning  them  of  the  fatal  confequences  of  their 
principles.  What  was  PltiUfopher  Coudorcefs  reply  ?  Attend 
to  it,  Citizens  of  the  fouthern  States  !  !  He  anfwered  with  true 
philofophic  calmnefs,  "  Peri/h  all  the  colo>;ifts,  rather  than  that 
we  mould  deviate  one  tittle  from  our  principles."  This  is  the 

t  Who  has  not  heard  from  the  (ecretary  the  iiraiies  ot  his  wom'.erful  Whirligi* 
Chair,  which  had  the  miraculous  quality  of  allowing  the  jies  ion  feated  in  it  to  turn 
his  head,  w'tlumt  moving  his  ta;I  ?  Who  has  rot  admired  hisfertite  ^t«i«5  in  the  pro- 
tluciion  ofltii  Epitursan  fide-board,  and  other  Gim  K,rackery.' 


(     '7     ) 

enlightened  Condorcctj  to  whom  his  friend  Jefferfon,  ftimulated 
by  a  fympathetic  philanthrophy,  fent  Banneker's  Almanac,  as 
the  higheil  proof  of  his  admiration  of  the  Negro's  work.  This 
is  \\\z  fame  Condorcet  who  could,  with  calmnefs,  fee  the  colonies 
laid  waile,  and  thoufands  of  aged  coloniils  and  innocent  women 
and  children  maiTacred,  and  yet  was  perpetually  preaching  up 
philanthropy  and  univerfal  benevolence.  Brijfui  was  much  fuch 
another  clv.ira&er,  and  they  both  defeivedly  met  the  fame  fate. 

As  ignorant  people  are  often  impofed  upon  by  an  appear-f 
ance  of  philofophy,  thofe,  wiio  have  ambitious  deiigns,  readily 
affume  its  externals  :  thefe  confifl  in  a  ridiculous  affectation 
of  iimplicity  and  humility,  in  a  thoufand  frivolities,  and  little 
puerile  tricks,  which  always  render  the  performer  contempt- 
ible in  the  eyes  of  difcerning  people,  who  foon  difcover  that 
under  the  alTumed  cloak  of  humility,  lurks  the  moft  ambi- 
tious fpirit,  the  moil  overweening  pride  and  hauteur,  and 
that  the  externals  of  fimplicity  and  humility  aiford  but  a  flim- 
fy  veil  to  the  internal  evidences  of  ariitocratic  fplendor,  fen- 
fuality  and  epicurean Jfrri. 

MR.  JEFFERSON  has  been  held  up  and  characterized  by 
his  friends  as  "  the  quiet,  modeil  retiring  philofopher — -as 
the  plain,  fimple,  unambitious  republican.*'  He  fhall  not  now, 
for  the  firil  time,  be  regarded  as  the  intriguing  incendiary — 
the  afpiring  turbulent  competitor,  unlefs  fails  lhall  warrant 
the  fuggeilion  :  of  thefe  an  enlightened  public  muft  judge. 

WHAT,  if  a  quiet,  modeil,  unambitious  philofopher,  at  a 
delicate  crifis,  withdrawing  himfelf  from  a  poll  of  duty,  from 
an  alledged  attachment  to  philofophical  purfuits,  and  a  itrong 
antipathy  to  public  honors,  mould  immediately  devote  his  hours 
of  retirement  to  mature  hisfchemes  r.f  concealed  ambition ,  and  at 
the  appointed  time,  come  forth  the  undifguifed  candidate  for 
tie  htgheft  honors,  and  for  the  moil  arduous  flation  to  which 
ambition  can  afpire  ? 

WOULD  not  this  trait  alone  fufficieiltly  mark  his  character 
and  his  views  ? 

To  fome  few  of  his  fellow  eittizens,  this  may  perhaps  be  the 
Jlrft  time  his  real  character  has  been  difcovered  ;  but  let  them  recoi- 
led that  there  is  always  "  ajirjl  time^  when  characters,  ftudi- 
ous  of  artful  difguifes  are  unveiled,  when  the  vizor  of  floicifm 
is  plucked  from  the  brow  of  the  epicurean,  when  the  plain 
garb  of  quaker  fimplicity  is  ilripped  from  the  concealed  volup- 
tuary, when  Ciffar,  coyfy  refufing  the  proffered  diadem,  is  found 
to  be  Casfar  rejecting  the  trappings,  "  but  tenacioufly  grafping 
faefubftauct  of  imperial  domination" 

G 


THE  prctcnfions  of  Thomas  Jefferfon  to  the  Prefidency,  in 
the  relation  of  a  philofopher,  having  been  canvaiTed,  we  mall 
next  proceed  to  examine  his  pretenfions  as  "  a  republican, 
and  a  friend  to  the  civil  and  religious  rights  of  his  fellow-citi  • 
zens." 

THE  obfervations  already  made,  refpecling  the  affumption 
of  the  externals  of  phi!ofophy,  will  apply  with  peculiar  force  to 
the  aflumption  of  the  externals  of  republicanifm.  There  are 
(mpoftors  in  patriotifm  as  well  as  in  philofophy  ;  and  as  the  for- 
mer are  the  moil  dangerous,  fo  ought  we  the  more  carefully  to 
be  on  our  guard  againlt  them.  It  is  now  become  fo  common  a 
trick  in  France,  in  England,  and  in  the  United  States,  for 
every  ambitious  demagogue  to  put  on  the  garb  of  patri  f>fm, 
to  vociferate  in  the  language  of  liberty,  that  every  prudent  and 
intelligent  citizen  immediately  fufpe&s  them  of  fome  mifchie- 
vous  defign  ;  and  thefc  fufpicions  have  been  warranted  by  Ta- 
tal  experience. — Who  wore  the  externals  of  republican ifm, 
who  fpoke  the  language  of  liberty  more  than  Marat  and  Ro- 
lefpierre  ?  Who  was  a  greater  friend  to  the  civil  and  religious 
rights  of  his  fellow-citizens  than  Cromwell  ?  Who  bellowed 
more  for  liberty  than  the  infurgent  and  fugitive  Bradford  ? 
In  France,  the  aftors  in  the  late  infurre&ion  againft  the  go- 
vernment, not  content  with  the  title  of  patriots,  arrogantly  ilil- 
edthemfelves  the  EXCLUSIVE  PATRIOTS.  In  fhort,  read,  but 
a  few  pages  of  ancient  or  modern  hiilory,  infpecl:  but  a  few  co- 
lumns of  a  newfpaper,  and  you  will  find,  that  every  afpiring, 
turbulent,  and  feditious  demagogue,  has  always  begun  by  af- 
fuming  the  externals  of  patriotiim,  and  vociferating  in  the  lan- 
guage of  liberty,  as  a  cloak  and  an  aid  to  his  nefarious  projeds. 

WHENEVER  I  hear  a  man  make  a  parade  of  his  own  republi- 
canifm,  or  his  patriotifm,  or  his  overflowing  zeal  for  his  coun- 
try's good,  I  inftantly  inquire,  whether  he  is  a  candidate  for 
office  ?  When  his  puffers  proclaim  his  republican  virtues,  and 
his  love  of  country,  I  inquire  into  his  paft  condutt  :  that  is  the 
true  left  of  patriotifm.  Republicanifm  (that  much  abufed 
word)  is  discovered  by  opinions,  not  by  profeffions.  Patriotifm 
annotmces  itfelf  by  DEEDS,  not  bywords.  When  WASHING- 
TON was  unanimoujly  called  to  the  Prelidency,  he  required  no 
puffing,  no  Hampdens  to  blazon  his  fame.  His  paft  conduct,  his 
genuine  merit,  his  long  fervices,  were  recorded  in  every  breaft. 
He  required  no  affected  retirement,  no  pretended  philofophy, 
no  coyifh  rejection  of  public  honors,  no  deep  planned  machine- 
ry to  bring  him  forth  to  public  notice.  And  whenever,  the 
public  eye  of  America  mall  fix  itfelf  on  a  prominent  object,  it 
will  have  been  attracted  to  it  by  well-known  virtues,  and  wejl*- 
tried  abilities  :  not  by  the  artificial  parade  of  arrogant  preten- 
fions,  or  the  deceptive  puffings  of  jntereiled  intriguers. 


(     '9     ) 

HAMPDEN,  in  bringing  forward  Mr.  Jefferfon's  repulKcamfm 
as  a  title  to  public  favor,  couid  not  have  ferioufly  intended  this 
very  common  and  univerfal  qualification  as  a  mark  of  any  pe- 
culiar merit  :  It  is  to  be  prefumed  we  are  all  republicans.  I 
have  mixed  a  great  deal  with  the  world  ;  I  have  vifited  every 
part  of  the  Union  ;  I  have  heard  the  political  fentiments  of  ev- 
ery description  of  people — and  I  can  with  truth,  and  moil  fo- 
lemnly,  aver,  that  I  have  never  met  with  a  citizen  of  the  Unit- 
ed States,  who  exprefTed  a  wifh  for  any  other  form  of  govern- 
ment for  the  United  States,  than  the  republican. 

YET  I  am  aware  that  Hampden,  in  fpecifying  this  qualifica- 
tion, among  others,  meant  lefs  to  point  at  the  pofleffion  of  it 
by  Mr.  Jefferfon,  than  at  the  fuppofed  want  of  it  in  his  com- 
petitor, Mr.  Adams. 

IT  is  well  known,  that  one  of  the  tricks  of  party  employed 
by  Mr.  Jefferfon  and  his  adherents,  has  been  to  reprefent  that 
worthy  citizen,  Mr.  Adams,  as  a  friend  to  monarchy  and  pri- 
vileged orders.  It  is  obferved  by  our  experienced  Prr/ident,  in 
his  late  excellent  addrefs,  "  that  one  of  the  expedients  of  par- 
"  ty,  to  acquire  influence  with  particular  diftricls,  is,  to  mif- 
"  reprefent  the  opinions  and  aims  of  other  diftricls."  "So,  one 
of  the  expedients  of  Mr.  Jefferibn's  party,  to  acquire  influence 
with  the  people,  who  are  republicans,  is,  to  mifreprefent  the 
opinions  of  their  competitors  and  opponents,  as  being  anti-re- 
publican. 

WITH  the  vain  hope  of  impreffing  this  opinion,  refpeCling 
Mr.  A«dams,  on  the  public  mind,  various  pafTages  have  been 
garbled  from  his  work,  entitled,  "  A  Defence  of  the  American 
Co»Jlitulions  ;"  a  book  exprefsly  written  for  the  purpofe  of 
•vindicating  th-fe  conftitutions  from  the  ftricliures  of  monfieur  Tur- 
got,  a  French  theorifl,  who  condemned  the  fcparation  of  the 
American  legiflatures  into  two  branches.  The  object  of  Mr. 
Adams  was,  to  mew  the  abfolute  neceflity,  in  a  republican  go- 
vernment, of  checks  and  balances  ;  and  that  veiling  all  the  le- 
giflative  power  in  a  Jingle  body;l  had,  at  all  times,  and  in  all  re- 
publican governments,  ended  in  the  flavery  of  the  people.  To 
prove  this,  he  refers  to  all  the  ancient  and  modern  republics  ; 
and  necefTarily  introduces  the  various  checks  and  balances 
which  had  been  devifed  in  each,  or  for  the  want  of  which  the 
people  had  loft  their  liberties. 

THIS  is  called  by  Hampden,  and  other  fycophants  of  Mr. 
Jefferfon,  "  an  elaborate  book  in  favour  of  privileged  orders, 
*'  and  of  a  plan  of  government,  compounded  of  a  fufficieut 
"  mixture  of  monarchy. " 


NOTHING  is  mere  falfe  than  this  affertion.  The  book  is 
in  favour  of  diftributing  the  legiflative  power  in  the  United 
States,  into  two  branches  :  and  ib  much  good  ienfe  and  found 
reaioning  does  it  contain,  that,  for  the  honour  of  Mr.  Adams, 
every  conftitution  which  has  been  made  in  the  United  States 

fmce  his  work    has  been  fo   organized. That  of  Pennfyl- 

vania,  which  had  always  been  conftru&ed  on  the  plan  of  a  fin- 
gle  branch,  was,  in  i  790,  a  few  years  after  Mr.  Adams's  work 
appeared,  changed,  and  organized  with  two  branches ; — a 
change  effected  almoft  unanimously  in  their  convention,  an4 
allowed  to  be  productive  of  the  moft  efiential  advantages. 

IF  this  party  have  fucceeded  in  fome  quarters  of  the  Union, 
where  th^  means  of  information  have  been  limited,  how  have 
t  e)  effected  their  bafe  purpofes  ?  By  garbling  detached  fen- 
tenccs  of  Mr,  Adams's  book,  and  mifreprefenting  his  opinions. 

THERE  is  no  publication  in  the  world  which  may  not  be 
.condemned  by  this  unfair  mode  of  proceeding.  When  an  in- 
dividual is  prosecuted  for  publifhing  a  libel  even  in  England, 
although  the  charge  is  founded  on  certain  paflages,  extracted 
from  the  work,  the  judge  always,  charges  the  jury  to  read  the. 
•<whole  work)  and  to  ground  their  verdict  on  the  whole,  taken  to- 
gether ;  the  jury  carry  out  the  book  and  read  the  whole  of  it, 
before  they  undertake  to  condemn  the  author.  Yet  Hamp- 
den,  probably  himfelf  a  fprig  of  the  law,  and  who,  1*11  ven* 
litre  to  fay,  has  never  read  the  book  he  condemns,  calls  on  the 
enlightened  and  liberal  citizens  of  America  to  pals  perpetual  fen^ 
tence  of  condemnation  on  Mr.  Adams,  (whom  he  allows  to 
have  be^en  a  patriot  of  177.6)  on  the  ftrength  of  a  few  broken 
and  deiacned  fcntcr.ces. 

JUDGE  Wilton,  in  the  convention  of  Pennfylvania,  when 
the  federal  conftitution  was  under  difcufiion,  made  the  follow- 
ing reply  to  fome  of  its  opponents  :  "  Take  detached  parts  of 
any  fyitem  whatever,  in  the  manner  thefe  gentlemen  have  hi- 
therto taken  this  conftitution,  and  you  will  make  it  abfurd  and 
•inconfiftent  with  itielf.  I  do  not  confine  this  obfervation  to 
human  performances  alone  ;  it  vvitl  apply  to  divine  writings. 
An  anecdote,  which  I  have  heard,  exemplifies  this  obfervation  : 
When  Sternhold's  and  Hopkins'  verfions  of  the  Pialms  was 
ufually  fung  in  churches,  a  line  was  firft  read  by  the  clerk, 
and  then  fung  by  the  congregation.  A  failor  had  ftepped  in, 
,-and  heard  the  clerk  read  this  line — 

"  The  Lord  will  come,  and  he  will  not " 

The  failor  ftared  ;  but  when  the  clerk  read  the  next  line, 
**  Keep  filence,  but  fpeak  out, ^ " 


the  fail  or  left  the  church,  convinced    the  people  were  not  in 
their  fenfes. 

"  This  (lory,  added  Mr.  Wilfon,  may  convey  an  idea  of 
the  treatment  of  the  plan  before  you  ;  although  it  contains 
found  fenfe,  when  connected,  yet  by  the  detached  manner  of 
confidering  it,  it  appears  highly  abfurd." 

The  pafiages,  which  have  been  felefted  from  Mr,  Adaras's 
book  by  his  enemies,  are  generally  narratives  concerning  the 
forms  of  government  of  other  countries,  in  which  there  exiil- 
ed  a  monarchy  or  privileged  orders,  and  the  defects  of  which 
he  adduces  as  illuilrations  of  his  iyitem  in  favor  of  a  balanced 
republican  government.  When  he  fpeaks  of  the  United  States-f- 
lic exprefsly  rejoices  at  our  happinefs,  "  becaufe  OUR  PROTI.E 
arefovereign,  and  becaufe  we  have  NO  HEREDITARY  titles,  honors, 
offices,  nor  Jiftinclions.  '  It  would  have  been  fmgular  indeed 
had  he  fet  out  with  writing  a  book  in  defence  of  the  American 
conftitutions ,  and  then  publifhed  a  panegyric  on  afyftem,  direct- 
ly oppofed  to  thofe  conftitutions  :  And  yet  this  grofs  abfurdity 
is  alledged  by  his  opponents. 

BUT  to  place  beyond  a  doubt  the  impreflion  which  this 
book,  (fo  much  reviled  by  our  jacobins)  has  made  on  the  difm- 
terefted,  candid  and  enlightened,  not  only  of  our  own,  but  of 
other  nations,  I  will  refer  to  the  fpeech  of  Bo'iffy  d*  Anglas, 
one  of  the  pureft  republicans  in  France,  in  the  convention,  on 
difcufiing  their  prefent  conftittttioo.  All  France  had  juft  at 
that  moment  fvvorn  eternal  hatred  to  monarchy  and  privileged 
orders  ;  any  encomiums  therefore  on  an  author  fuppofed  to  be 
friendly  to  monarchy  and  privileged  orders,  would  not  have 
been  favorably  received  ;  Mr.  Adams's  book  had  been  tranf- 
lated  into  the  French  language,  had  been  much  read  by  that 
nation,  and  was  well  known  :  BoifTy  d'Anglas  declared,  in 
the  convention,  that  "  the  committee  who  had  drawn  up 
the  conftitution,  were  much  indebted  to  the  EXCELLENT 
WORK  of  that  celebrated  American  patriot,  JOHN  ADAMS,  for 
many  of  the  LIGHTS  they  had  acquired  on  the  fubje&  of  true 
REPUBLICAN  government."  Such  was  the  opinion  formed  of 
Mr.  Adams's  book  by  thofe  who  had  no  perfonal  intercft  in  at- 
tempting to  difparage  the  work  or  its  author. 

MR.  ADAMS'S  work,  which  has  furnifhed  fuch  a  handle 
for  the  malignant  criticifms  of  his  adverfaries,  and  of  thofe 
who  dread  his  juft  pretenfions  to  the  public  gratitude,  wai 

I  See  Defence  of  the  American  Conltitiuiens,  page  95. 


written  in  the  year  1786.  Yet  we  heard  little  of  his  alledged 
monarchical  principles  till  about  the  year  1791.  This  will 
be  hereafter  accounted  for.  It  is  very  certain  that  Mr.  Jef- 
f erf  on  himfelf  did  not,  in  the  year  1789,  three  years  after 
the  work- was  written,  fufpecl:  Mr.  Adams  of  foftering  any 
fuch  principles  ;  for  we  find  in  a  letter  f  from  Mr.  Jefferfon, 
dated  Paris,  March  15,  1789,  thefe  expreffions  :  "  I  know 
"  there  are  feme  among  us  who  would  now  eftablifh  a  mo- 
«*  narchy,  but  they  are  inconfideralle  in  number  and  weight  of 
"  chamber"  No  one  will  doubt  that  Mr.  JefFerfon  had  then 
feen  Mr.  Adams's  book  ;  the  intimacy  which  had  Jong  fub- 
fifted  between  thofe  characters,  the  cunofity  of  the  former  on 
literary  and  particularly  on  political  fubjeds,  his  fituation  as 
the  minifter  of  the  United  States  at  a  court,  and  among  learn- 
ed men,  at  that  time  particularly  inquifitive  on  fuch  fubjects, 
where  fuch  a  work  would  be  neceffarily  an  intcrcfting  and  ge- 
neral topic  of  converfation,  and  the  high  charafter  of  the  lat- 
ter, then  a  minifter  at.  a  neighbouring  court,  are  all  circumftan- 
ces  which  muft  remove  every  doubt  of  the  fact. 

As  little  doubt  can  there  be  that  at  the  time  Mr.  Jefferfon 
TV  rote  the  letter  referred  to,  he  did  not  confider  Mr.  Adams 
as  a  perfon  inconsiderable  in  'weight  of  character.  Thence  it  is 
clear  that  although  Mr.  Jefferfon  had  read  Mr.  Adams's  book 
in  1789,  he  did  not  then  infer  from  it  that  the  author  was  a 
friend  to  monarchy,  for  had  he  drawn  fuch  a  conclufion,  he 
could  not  have  faid,  with  truth,  that  the  friends  of  monarchy 
•were  inconfiderable  in  weight  of  character.  What  afterwards 
led  to  the  difcovery  that  Mr.  Adams  was  a  favorer  of  monar- 
chy, is  now  to  be  unfolded. 

In  the  fummer  of  1790,  the  Prefident  was  afflicted  witb 
an  alarming  diforder  which  threatened  his  life*  Already  a  fuc- 
ceffor  was  talked  of  ;  various  candidates  prefented  themfelves 
to  the  public  mind,  and  among  them  the  Vice-Preiident  ftood 
moft  confpicuous.  It  inftamly  became  the  fyftematic  policy 
of  Mr.  JefFerfon  and  his  adherents,  to  ruin  in  the  public  efti- 
mation  a  formidable  rival,  by  charging  the  Vice-Prefident  with 
an  attachment  to  monarchy  and  privileged  orders. 

About  that  time,  Mr.  Jefferfon,  being  fecretary  of  ftate, 
conferred  a  Jinecure  office  in  his  department  with  a  falary  of 
two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  a  year  on  Mr.  Freneau,  to  induce 
him  to  remove  to  Philadelphia,  and  fet  up  a  newfpaper  at  the 
feat  of  government,  called  the  National  Gazette.  This  paper 

..  $ i  This  letter  and  fome  others,  fuppofeeT  to  be  written  to  Mr.  Mad'dbn,  on  the  fub- 
left  of  the  new  conJtiturior  of  the  United  Starrs,  were  publilhed  in  Dunlao's  p;iper 
ln  i  792,  to  prove  (what  they  did  not;  Mr.  Jefferfon 's  approbation  of  that  coaltitunon. 


ibrthw  itli  t  ccmcd  with  the  moft  illiberal  abufe  of  Mr.  Adams, 
and  twice  a  week  regularly  rung  the  changes  againft  his  fyilem 
of  monarchy  and  privileged  orders. 

BUT,  to  give  more  eclat  and  character  to  the  charge,  the 
fecretary  of  ftate  himfelf,  who  only,  two  years  before,  had 
not  difcovered  any  thing  injurious  to  the  public  weal  in  Mr. 
Adams's  book,  did  not  difdain  to  appear  in  print,  and  com- 
mence the  attack. 

THE  firft  volume  of  Thomas  Paine's  "Rights  of  Man," 
made  its  appearance  ;  the  opportunity  was  eagerly  feized,  to 
anfwer  the  double  purpofe  of  wounding  a  competitor,  and  of 
laying  in  an  additional  (lock  of  popularity,  by  affociating  and 
circulating  the  name  of  Thomas  Jefferfon  with  a  popular  pro- 
duction of  a  once  favorite  writer,  on  a  favorite  fubje6t. 

FOR  this  purpofe,  the  fecretary  of  ftate  wrote  an  epiftle  to 
a  printer  in  Philadelphia,  tranfmitting  the  work  for  republica- 
tion,  and  containing  the  following  pafiage  :  "  1  am  extreme- 
"  ly  pleafed  to  find  it  will  be  reprinted  here,  and  that  fome- 
"  thing  is  at  length  to  be  publicly  faid  againft  the  political  he- 
'*  refies  which  have  fprung  up  among  us.  I  have  no  doubt 
"  our  citizens  will  rally  a  fecond  time  round  the  Jlandard  of 
"  common  fenfe." 

THERE  was  not  a  man  in  the  United  States  acquainted  with 
the  infmuations  which  had  been  propagated  againft  Mr.  Adams, 
who  did  not  inftantly  apply  the  remark  ;  and  the  fignal  was  fo 
well  underftood  by  the  partizans  of  the  writer,  that  a  general 
attack  immediately  commenced. 

THE  National  Gazette  of  Freneau,  faithful  to  its  duty,  and 
the  newfpapers  of  the  party  in  the  different  ftates,  refounded 
with  invective  and  fcurrility  againft  the  patriot,  who  was  thus 
marked  out  as  the  objeft  of  perfecution. 

BUT  it  was  quickly  perceived  that  difcerning   and  refpedla- 
ble  men  difapproved  of  the  ftep  which  the  fecretary  had  tak- 
en.     It  was  of  confequence   to  endeavour  to  maintain   then- 
good  opinion,      Infmcere  proteftations  and  excufes,  as  frivo- 
lous as  aukward,   were  multiplied  by  the  fecretary  to  veil  the 
real   defign.     "  The    gentleman    alluded    to,"    he   protefted, 
'*  never  once  entered  his  mind  ;  it  was  never   imagined  that  the 
1  printer  would  be  fo  incautious  as  to  publifh  the  letter.      No- 
1  thing  more  had  been  in  view,  than  to  turn  a  handfome  pe- 
'  riod,  and  avoid  the  baldnefs  of  a  note,  that  did  nothing  but 
'  prefent  the  compliments  of  the  writer  ! " 

THUS,  a  folernn  invocation  to  the  people  of  America,  on  a 


mofl  ferious  and  important  fubject,  dwindled  at  o:\ce  into  a 
brilliant  conceit  that  tickltd  the  imagination  too  much  to  be 
refilled.  The  imputation  of  levity  was  preferred  to  that  of 
malice. 

BUT  when  the  people  of  America  prefented  themfelves  to 
the  diihirbed  fancy  of  the  patriotic  fecretary,  as  a  routed  hoft, 
fcattered  and  difperfed  by  that  political  forcerer,  the  Vice- 
Prefident,  how  was  it  poffible  to  refill  the  heroic,  the  chival- 
rous defv c,  of  erecting  for  them  fome  magic  flandard  of 
orthodoxy,  fuch  as  Tom  Paine,  and  endeavouring  to  rally  them 
round  it,  for  their  mutual  protection  and  fafety. 

IN  fo  glorious  a  caufe,  the  confiderations — that  a  citizen  of 
the  United  States  had  written,  in  a  foreign  country,  a  book, 
containing  ilrictures  on  the  government  of  that  country,  which 
were  regarded  by  it  as  libellous  andfedititus — that  he  had  dedi- 
cated  this  book  to  the  Chief  Magijlrate  of  the  Union — that  the 
republication  of  it,  under  the  aufplces  of  the  fecretary  of  Jlate, 
would  wear  the  appearance  of  its  having  been  promoted,  at 
lead  of  its  being  patronifid  by  the  government  of  this  country — were 
confideiations  too  light  and  unimportant  to  occaiion  a  mo- 
ment's hesitation. 

THOSE  who,  after  an  attentive  review  of  circumflances,  cart 
be  deceived  by  the  artifices  which  have  been  employed  to  var- 
niih  over  this  very  exceptionable  proceeding,  mull  underiland 
little  of  human  nature,  and  belittle  read  in  thofe  arts,  which, 
in  all  countries  and  at  all  times,  have  ferved  to  difguife  the  ma- 
chinations of  factious  and  intriguing  men. 

WE  have  feen,  that  \\izfe  fuppofcd  herefies,  at  which  Mr.  Jef- 
ferfon  affected  fo  much  alarm,  were  the  opinions  difieminated 
throughout  the  able  work  of  Mr.  Adams, — a  citizen,  pre-emi- 
nent for  his  early,  intrepid,  faithful,  perfevering,  and  compre- 
heniively  ufeful  fervices — a  man,  pure  and  unfpotted  in  private 
life — a  patriot,  having  a  high  and  folid  title  to  the  efteem,  the 
gratitude,  and  the  confidence  of  his  fellow-citizens — a  title 
which  the  foul  and  peflilent  calumnies,  which  have  been  circu- 
lated through  the  country,  have  never  yet  contaminated. 

WE  have  feen  the  bafe  arts  which  have  been  employed  to  dif- 
tort  his  real  fentiments,  by  felecting  and  disjointing  detached 
paflages.  We  (hall  now  fee  whether  a  lefs  unfair  proceeding 
will  not  convict  Mr.  Jefftrfon  himfelf  of  having  foftered  fome 
political  herejies. 

In  the  difcufiion  of  the  charges  alledged  againil  Mr.  Adams, 
I*  have  animadverted  on  the  unfairnefs  of  gaibling  fentences- 


and  mangling  cxpreflions  for  the  purpofe  of  condemning  an 
author's  work  :  and  I  have  adverted  to  the  pra&ice  in  the 
courts  of  judicature  in  England,  in  profecutions  for  a  libel, 
where  the  jury  never  condemn,  <;  t'M'ibty  havs  read  the  .iv'hoh 
«  war*;* 

WILL  the  enlightened  citizens  of  America  condemn  an  old 
and  faithful  fervant,  whom  even  Hampden  ilik-s,  "  a  pc.tr tut  of 
"  '76,  '  before  they  have  allowed  hi;n  the  means  of  defence, 
which  are  allowed  in  England  to  tne  meaneft  individual  ;  — 
Let  them  r^anhis  Defence  of  the  American  Conftituticns,  and 
I  fliall  be  content  to  abide  by  their  verdiA  ; — but  let  them 
fpurn,  wkhjuil  contempt,  the  venomous  infmuations  of  par- 

*>'• 

WOULD  Mr.  Jefrerfon  be  content  to  have  bis  opinions  ex- 
amined •  -:i  ins  be.ii  applied  by  bio  partizans  to 
Mr.  Adams  :  Would  he  scquie.fcc  without  appeal,  in  a  fen- 
tence  of  condemnation,  which  mould  be  altogether  grounded 
on  mangled  quotations,  and  partial  extracts  from  his  writ- 


THE  charge  againft  Mr.  Adams  by  Hampden  is,  that  he  is 
an  advoc:  Diarchy  and  privileged  orders  ;  and  this 

charge  is  (aid  to    be    founded   on  certain    exprefiions    in  his 
work. 

I  DO  not  mean  to  retort  with  feverity  the  charge,  and  ac- 
cufe  Mr.  Jeiferfon  of  being  at  this  time,  an  advocate  for  mo- 
narchy r.nd  privileged  orders  ;  but  I  am  warranted  in  afferting, 
that,  without  doing  any  violence  to  the  context,  I  can  pro- 
duce from  his  writings  particular  pafiages,  as  much  in  favour 
of  monarchy  and  privileged  orders,  as  any  paffages  in  Mr.  A- 
dams's  book.  v 

FOR  example — In  fpeaking  of  the  impolicy  cf  increafmg1 
the  population  of  the  United  States,  by  encouraging  the  in- 
troduction of  foreigners,  in  page  93  of  his  Notes  on  Virginia, 
he  obferves,  that  foreigners  will  infufe  into  our  government 
their  fpirit,  &c.  ;  bv  waiting  fome  »ycars  longer,  our  govern- 
ment will  be  more  homogeneous,  more  peaceable,  more  dura- 
ble. He  then  adds,  "  Suppofe  f  twenty  millions  of  R.EPUB- 
"  LIC AN  Americans,  thrown  all  of  a  fudcen  into  France, 
"  what  would  be  the  condition  cf  that  kingdom  .?  If  it  would 

"  be     MORE     tURBULSNT,     LESS      HAPPY,    LESS     STRONG,      WC 

**  may  believe,  that  the  addition  of  half  a  million  of  foreign- 

f  A  very  curiousTJppofition,  by  tlie  [>ye,  innfnvarli  as  diPrr  «.vpr<?  nor  at  that  time, 
TiJPtKE  iiiillims  (it '  rrpubl.ciin  Anicricaus  in  the  \vc«rld.  V.'acre,  1'ien,  was  He  in 
fintl  ilicfe  twenty  millions? 

D 


"  ers  to  our  prcfent  numbers,  would  produce  a   fimilar  effect 
"  here." 

Now,  it  is  evident,  from  the  above  extrad,  that  Mr.  Jejfer- 
fo  believed  that  a  monarchical  government  was  the  bell  luited 
to  France,  and  that  fending  there  twenty  millions  of  republi- 
can Americans  Would  render  France  more  turluler.t,  l/fs  happy, 
and  ItfiJlroKg.  If  he  thought  that  twenty  millions  of  Ameri- 
can republicans  (who  arc  juftly  reckoned  the  bell  republicans 
on  the  globe)  would  dif'jrgarife  France,  and  diminijh  her  hoppl- 
nefs  and  htr  Jlfergth^  he  inuft  have  been  fully  perfuaded,  that 
thirty  millions  of  French  repull'ica  s  (who,  with  all  their  merits 
are  certainly  inferior  to  the  Americans  in  the  fcience  of  fdf- 
government)  would  produce  thofe  efie6ts  in  a  much  greater 
degree. 

AN  opinion,  in  favour  of  monarchy  may  then  without  dif- 
ficulty be  inferred  from  the  foregoing  paffage; 

IN  page  126  of  the  fame  work,  in  enumerating  what  he 
calls  the  capital  defeS*  of  the  conllitution  of  Virginia,  he  com- 
plains bitterly  of  the  conftru£tion  ot  the  fen  ate.*  as  not  being 
fufHciently  ar':Jlocrahc^  although  the  members  are  chofen  for 
four  years,  as  long  a  period  as  in  any  ftate  in  the  Union,  ex- 
cept Maryland.  But  he  complains,  becanie  the  fts-ats*  and 
the  electors  of  the  fenate,  do  not  conftitute  a  different  i,  terejl 
from  the  reft  of  the  community.  He  fays,  "  The  /*  ate  is, 
"  by  its  cdnftkution,  t.o  homogeneous  with  the  hou;,.  of  dele- 
"  gates  ;  being  chofen  by  the  fame  eleftorh,  «it  the  fame  time, 
"and  out  of  the  fame  fnbjetts,  the  choice  falls  of  courfe,  on 
"  men  of  the  fume  defcripiion.  The  purpofe  of  eilablifliing  dif- 
"  ferent  houfes  of  legislation  is,  to  introduce  the  i  jiuf-ce  of  dif- 
"  fcrent  irdcrejls  or  different  principles.  In  fome  of  the  Ameri- 
**  can  Hates  the  delegates  and  fenators  are  fo  chofen,  as  that 
"  the  firft  reprefent  the  perform,  and  the  fecond  the  property  -J- 
*'  of  the  ftate  ;  but,  with  us,  wealth  and  ivifdom  have  an 
"  equal  chance  for  admifllon  into  both  houfes.  We  do  not 
"  therefere  derive,  from  the  feparation  of  our  kgiflature  into 
"  two  houfes,  thofe  le-:ef.ts  which  ^.proper  complication  of  prli- 
**  clples  is  capable  of  producing,  and  thofe  which  alove  can 
"  compenfate  the  evils  which  may  be  produced  by  their  dif- 
««  fentions." 

Now  can  there  be  a  ftronger  recommendation  of  ar'ijlrjcracy 
and  privileged  orders  than  we  find  in  this  paflage  ?  He  wifhes  to 
fee  introduced  into  the  conftitution  of  Virginia,  an  INFLUENCE 

t  There  is  notliin^  of  the  kind  iu  any  of  the  American  coniiitutioi-s ;  the  aflertiou 
uuntri.e. 


(     '7     ) 

of  INTERESTS  different  from  thofe  of  the  mafs  of  the  fi-l]cSs 
(as  he  calls  the  people)  and  to  eftablifn  a  permanent  con- 
Ititutional  feparation  of  two  orders  of  people,  on  different  prin- 
ciples :  one  to  be  reprefented  by  the  Senate,  the  othrr  by 
the  Delegates  ;  ho  wiihes  to  have  WEALTH  altogether  repre- 
fented in  the  Senate,  and  ivlfdom  in  the  other  houfe,  and 
laments  that  wrfhm  has  an  equal  chance  with  wealth  of  admif- 
iion  into  the  Senate.  What  is  all  this  but  an  eilablifhment  of 
privileged  orders  and  of  an  artftocrecy  of  the  rankcll  kind  ? 
The  wealib  of  the  ilate  is  to  conilitute  a  SEPARATE  CLASS, 
to  be  reprefented  EXCLUSIVELY  in  a  Senate,  which  is  to  be 
organized  on  different  principles,  and  which  is  to  maintain  ai 
influence  nf  dijfert-nt  inttrejls  from  thofe  of  the  reft  of  the  foci- 
ety.  Such  a  body,  having  an  equal  participation  of  the  le« 
giflative  power  with  the  poorer  reprefentatives  of  the  poorer 
clafs,  won!  ;  i  acruih  the  other  branch  and  ufurp  all  pow- 
er ;  it  would  foon  erect  itfelf  into  an  hereditary  ariftocracy, 
like  that  of  Venice.  Is  there  any  diftinftion,  except  in  names, 
between  a  privileged  order,  and  a  diflinct  clafs  of  men,  enabled 
by  their  poiieliion  of  wealth  and  exclufive  reprefentation  in  a 
branch  of  the  legislature  to  maintain  a  feparate  influence  in  the 
ilate  ?  What  in  fad  is  a  priyileged  order  but  a  feparate  clafs  of 
men,  poflV  fling  by  law  exclufive  privileges  ?  What  did  Mr.  Jef- 
ferfon  vviih  to  eitablifh  in  Virginia? — "  a  feparate  a.\\6.  privileged 
<J  clafsj  compofed  of  the  wealthy,  poffefling  by  law  an  i  flu-'nce, 
"  different  from  that  ofthereit  of  the  people,  m&exc/u/t've/y  re- 
*'  prefented  in  the  Senate  :"  Now  I  defy  his  champions  to  pro- 
duce any  fragment  from  Mr.  Adams's  book,  fo  pointedly  in  favor 
of  privileged  orders,  as  applicable  to  the  United  States,  as  the 
foregoing  quotation. 

AN  ariftocracy  of  wealth  being  thus  efrabliHied  by  law,  tllL's 
would  follow  of  courfe  ;  it  matters  little  whether  fuch  a  Virgi- 
nia fenator,  as  Mr.  Jeflerfoa  wifhtd  to  create,  was  to  be  ililed 
/jortora&k,  or  ilhiftrlous,  the  title  of  a  Venetian  fenator  ;  the  ht- 
ter  would  moil  probably  be  annexed  ;  for  wj  find  even  Harnp- 
Jcn,  while  extolling-  the  republican  character  of  his  patron,  fo 
far  forgets  himfelr  as  to  ftile  him  the  ilbjlrivus  J-ffirfai  ;  he 
presently  after  ipeaks  of  his  wealth  ;  thus  conncciing  liis  riches 
with  his  illujlrwus  character,  as  though  he  hadjuft  been  reading 
his  plan  of  a  Virginia  houfe  of  nobles. 

WILL  it  be  now  denied  that  even  Thomas  Jefferfon,  that  pro- 
totype of  repubiiciniim,  has  in  his  writings,  countenanced  doc- 
trines favorable  to  monarchy  and  ariitocracy  ;  that  he  has,  in 
this  refpect,  at  ieaft  as  much  forfeited  his  title  to  the  public 
favor,  as  Mr.  Adams,  and  that  henceforward  his  pnrtizans,  if 
tl>ey  have  any  fenfe  of  decency,  ought  to  be  iilent  on  this  fubjecl  ? 


(       28        ) 

IT  has  been  Hated,  that  the  obj.ft  of  Mr.  Adans's  bock 
was  to  point  out  the  tendency  of  a  finale  legislative  branch  to 
deilroy  the  liberties  cf  the  people.  His  reasoning-  in  favour 
of  a  diitribution  ol  ",v,.ve  povvxr  into  two  branches, 

and  the  c  -.ks  r.nci  balan/ies,  has  been  wick- 

edly perverted  into  a  re'afoning  in  fuppoit  uf  privileged  orders. 
Who  has  not  feen  the  venemous  efluiions,  and  the  low  ribaldry, 
which  have  of  late  been  <dlfgcrged  from  the  Jacolir.e  preffes  a- 
gainft  Mr.  AJ;irns's  fyiltm  of  checks  and  balances?  Who 
would  have  fuppofed,  that  Jtmilar  reafoning  and  principles 
we;e  ..o  be  found  in1  the  v/crks  of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  t\\zfuvsr'rte  of 
tfjof^  pr.J^-s,  and  the  very  uiua  who  had  firft  founded  the  alr.rm 
agai:,it  ,v!r.  Adums's  iyitem  of  checks  and  balances,  in  other 
words,  i&ijfoKiical  kkrejies  ?  Such  however  is  the  fact. 

IN  ;  s  en  Virginia,  page  126,  the  conflitution  cf  Vir- 

ginia is  cc  nd  tinned  by  Mr.  Jelier'bn,  because  "  all  the  powers 
**  of  government  refuit  to  the  legiilative  body."  "  The  tori* 
"  cer  trail- *  thefe,  (he  adds,  in  the  fame  hands,  is  precirely  the 
"  f  c!jln;'io-!  of  de  pctic  government.  It  will  be  no  allevia- 
"  tion  tl.?.t  thefe  powers  will  be  exercifed  by  a  •  plurality  of 
"  hands,  and  not  by  a  iingle  one. —  C  red  and  ft-ver  ty- 

*'  three  defpots  would  fu rely  be  as  oppivifive  as  »#£*  I.et  tho'-.j 
tl  who  doubt  it,  turn  t.ieir  eyes  CM  the  republic  cf  Venice.  As 
"  little  will  it  ava  1  us  that  they  are  cbvfc.i  I'.'  .'  :  an 

"  efaftfaje  defpotifm  was  not  the  government  we  fbugBt  for  ; 
**  but  one  wnieh  ihould  net  only  be  '  •-  on  free  priaciplts, 

*{  but  in  which  the  powers  of  government  Ihould  be  lo  divided 
"  and  l:iJc.  'ced  among  feveri.l  bodies  of  magilhacy,  as  that  no 
"  one  could  tranfcend  their  legal  limits,  without  bein^ 
"  eiftcKiu'iy  decked  and  restrained  by  the  others.  ' 

Now,  here  we  find  a  very  able  'on  of  checks  and 

balances  ;  and  we  are  told,    that  v  .  tn  inji  even  thofe 

whom  '-'j:   elccl  curf elves,   unlefj  ch  e  other  power  ; 

for,  if  not  fo  cliEc^td,  they  will  foon  be  conveited  into  eh 


SUCH   were  the  opiniona  of  Mr.  JefFerfnn,   when  he  wrote 
his  Note,  :i::u.      W,.-  nt   refdtnce  in 

Framed  ha;?  ciTcaed   a  total  cliange  in   ihefe  opiuicns,  we  have 
not  the  •mat'erials  to  decide;  thofe  we   ;  \oivcthe  mat- 

ter in   ohic'.irin  ;  for   ^tKoijgh   in.  his  letter  to   Mr.  M^difca 
Paiis,  dai^vl  bec^mbe?    20,    1787,  on  the  iul.jeCt  of   the 
new  federal  ccnliuution,  he  fays,   "  I  like    tie  -  Dative   given 


.•)    •,-.:]<;,•!.;  I;."  the  f. !t  •>•''•  ll.-ir.i nt  of  di  f;;uic  £c-'.efnir.cnr,   bi'.t  it  i- 
c  ;o  Lu.^iu-Llu.u  Iio.v'  ii  isti.c  dejt&!.lth  LI  if. 


to  the  executive  ;"  yet,  a  few  years  after  his  return  from 
France,  this  kind  of  check  was  ranked  by  him  among  Mr.  A- 
dams's  political  bereft  ;  and  though,  in  that  letter,  he  feems 
to  approve  of  the  diitribution  of  the  legiflative  power,  by  the 
American  coi*ilitution,  into  two  branches  ;  yet  he,  is  faid  to 
have  been  coumlted  about,  and  to  have  approved,  the  French 
conititation  of  1791*  which  vefted  the  whole  legiilative  power 
in  one  branch,  and  thus,  according  to  nio  doctrine,  eftabliihed 
(or,  to  ufe  iiis  exprellion,  defined}  an  elealv:  deiujtifm. 

THE  friends  cf  Mr.  Jefferfur,  while  they  hold  him  up  as  the 
quinteiTence  of  rep  .  afteft  to  be  prodigioufly  alarmtd 

leit  the  enemies  of  republicanifm  mould  gain  the  afccndancy  in 
the  United  States.  Nothing  can  be  more  prepoileious  than 
this  filly  affectation.  Thole  who  make  the  molt  oilentatious 
parade  of  it,  are  known  to  be  characters  the  moit  anti-republi- 
can in  their  private  lii'r,  their  public  conduct,  and  ail  their  views. 

IT  is  certain,  tliat  rfon  himfelf.  whatever  he   might 

affe6l,  entertains  none  of  thefe  fears.  In  a  letter,  already  re- 
ferred to,  fro^i  him,  are  thefe  expreiiioas  :  "  The  riling  race 
"  (in  the  United  States)  are  all  republicans.  We  were  edu- 
"  cated  r.i  royalifm  :  no  wonder  if  fome  of  us  retain  that  idol* 
"  atry  ililL  Our  young  people  are  educated  in  republicanifm  ; 
"  an  ap'j/lacy  from  that  to  royaliirn,  is  unprecedented  and  tm- 
"  po/tHl?"  What  ground  then  for  these  appreii-niions  ?  How 
muft  every  judicious  and  independent  citizen  reprobate  fuch 
bafe  attempts  to  miflsad  the  ];5i';'i  -,  i  :d  to  deflime  fome  of  the 
bed  character G  1.1  the  Unfttfd  States  ?  And  of  whom  are  thefe 
fears  entertained  ?  Of  Mr.  Adams! — a  citizen  who,  through 
the  arduous  progrefs  of  a  long  public  life,  has  never  been  be- 
trayed into  o::  :ch  his  opponents  can  object  to  him  ; 
for,  it  is  to  be  obferved,  that,  alihougli  he  has  been  in  public 
life  fjr  near  thirty  years,  the  aitack  h':s  public  coiuluft, 
but  are  driven  to  the  wretched  expedient  of  criticiiing  his  po- 
litical fentiments,  by  mifquoting  his  writings.  For  my  part, 
were  I  a  fouthern  planter,  owning  negroes,  I  (hou  d  be  ten 
thoufand  tim.?s  n^ore  alarmed  at  Mr.  Jefferfon's  ardent  wifli 
for  ema;icipaiio::t  than  at  a:iy  fa':c'tful  dangers  from  monar- 
chy. Qwancipatiori  is  a  pofjlble  thing  ;  but  apojlacy  to  roya/ifm, 
according  to  Mr.  JcfFerfon,  is  im^jjllle. 

I  HAVE  produced  written  fentiments  of  Mr.  Jefferfon, 
which  will  bear  a  conitruclion  at  leail  as  unfriendly  to  republi- 
canifm, as  any  ever  affixed  to  Mr.  Adams's  works.  I  will  now 
call  on  the  adverfaries  of  the  latter  to  produce,  from  the  works 
of  the  former,  a  more  glowing  panegyric  on,  or  a  more  alfec- 


(     30     ) 

tionate  evidence  of  attachment  to,  true  republicanifm,  than  is 
to  be  found  in  the  following  paflage  of  Mr.  Adams's  Defence. 
After  pointing  out,  with  great  ability,  the  fuperior  advantages 
of  a  republican  government,  he  fays,  in  page  95,  "  After  all, 
"  let  us  compare  every  conftitution  we  have  feen  with  thofe  of 
"  the  United  States  of  America,  and  we  fliall  have  no  reafon 
"  to  blufh  for  our  country.  On  the  contrary,  we  mall  feel 
"  the  ftrongeft  motives  to  fall  upon  our  knees,  in  gratitude  to 
"  heaven,  for  having  bee  a  gracioufly  pleafed  to  give  us  birth 
*'  and  education  in  that  country,  and  for  having  deftined  us  to 
**  live  under  her  laws.  We  mail  have  reafon  to  ex"lt,  if  we 
"  make  our  comparifon  with  England,  and  the  JE  :glijh  co~Jli- 
««  tufion.  0.<r  people  are  undoubtedly  fovtreign  —  All  the  land- 
"  ed  and  other  pioperty  is  in  the  hands  of  the  citizens  —  Not 
"  only  their  reprefentatives,  but  their  fe^aiors  and  governors, 
"  are  a  /  >u:aUy  chofen.  —  There  are  no  hereditary  titles,  honors, 
"  offices,  nor  diftinfiions.  The  legiflative,  executive  and  judi- 
"  cial  powers  are  carefully  feparated  from  each  other.  The 
tf  powers  of  the  one,  the  few,  and  the  many,  are  nicely  ba- 
(<  lanced  in  their  legiflutu,res.  "Trials  ly  jury  are  preferved  in 
"  all  their  glory  ;  and  there  is  no  Jla~  :di  g  army.  The  habeas 
"  r'-rp'.:s  is  in  full  force  ;  and  the  prefs  is  the  mojl  free  in  the 
*'  world  :  and  where  all  thefe  circumftances  take  place,  it  is 
"  unneceflfary  to  add,  that  the  laws  alone  can  govern." 

I\  this  pafTage,  Mr.  Adams  goes  beyond  Mr.  Jefferfon  in 
commendation  of  democratic  republicanifm,  for  he  approves  of 
the  annual  choice  of  fexators,  as  in  New-England,  while  Vr. 
Jefferfon,  not  content  with  a  quadrennial  election  of  the 
ienate  in  Virginia,  wants  to  invtfl  that  body  with  peculiar  and 
exclufwe  privileges  ;  Mr.  Adams  rejoices  that  we  have  no  here- 
ditary diltinclions  in  America  ;  Mr.  Jefferfon  was  defirous  of 
clothing  the  wealthy  clafs  of  Virginia,  with  conftitutional,  per- 
manent and  exclulive  privileges,  amounting  to  hereditary  dif~ 


HAMPDEN,  unable  to  attack  with  effect  any  part  of  Mr. 
Adams's  known  public  a£ts,  though  fo  long  in  public  life,  relates 
-dfatf,  as  he  calls  it,  refpeflhg  hit  public  cc,:dutt  :  "  When  feve- 
"  ral  important  queftions,  which  had  received  the  fandion  of 
'*•  the  Iioufe  of  reprefentatives,  have  been  fubmitted  to  his  deci- 
*'  flon,  as  prefident  of  the  ftnate,  upon  an  equal  dividon  of  that 
'*  body,  he  has  uniformly  decided  againft  the  opinion  of  the  re- 
t(  prefentp.tives,  which  we  may  reafonably  fuppofe  to  be  the 
"  opinion  of  the  people  !  I  believe,"  he  adds,  "  no  member 
*'  of  congrefs  will  contradicl;  this  facl." 

WITHOUT  being  a  member  of  congrefs,  I  will  undertake  to 


(     3«     ) 

contradict  this  fa&,  and  to  prove  that  Hampdcn's  aflertion  is  a* 
falfe,  as  his  reaioning  thereon  is  abfurd. 

As  the  vice  prefident  is,  by  the  conftitution,  placed  in  the 
chair  of  the  fenate,  v.'ith  a  calling  vote,  it  was  intended  that  he 
fhould  exercife  his  judgment,  in  giving  that  vote  :  and  whether 
the  meafure  in  queftion,  had  been  approved  by  the  houfe  of  re- 
prefentatives  or  not,  he  ought  not  to  concur,  if  his  judgment 
decidedly  rejected  it. 

A  memorable  inftance  may  however  be  adduced,  where 
Mr.  Adams  gave  the  calling  vote  in  the  affirmative,  in  refpeft 
to  a  meafure  which  had  paffed  the  houfe  of  representatives  :  it 
was  in  the  feffion  of  1790;  a  vote  had  pafled  the  reprefenta- 
tives  for  removing  Congrefs  from  New- York  ;  this  had  been  a 
fubjecl:  of  much  contefl,  and  the  vote  was  confidered  as  a  great 
triumph  by  the  fouthern  members,  becaufe  it  was  an  important 
ftcp  towards  fixing  the  feat  of  government  in  a  more  fouthern 
iituation  :  the  fenate  were  equally  divided  on  the  queftion,  Mr. 
Adams  decided  in  the  affirmative,  and  on  being  aiked  by  fome 
eaflorn  member  (who  complained  that  fuch  vote  had  been  inju- 
rious to  the  eailern  flates)  why  he  had  voted  in  the  affirmative, 
he  made  the  following  reply,  which  was  related  to  me  by  a 
member  of  the  fenate  who  heard  him,  "  That  whenever  the 
fenate  mould  be  equally  divided,  on  a  fubjeft,  which  had  pafled 
the  houfe  of  representatives,  he  fhould  always  'vote  iv'tih  the  hcufe, 
unlefs  he  had  very  clear  and  convincing  reafons  in  his  judgment 
againft  it. 

THE  two  houfes  differing  afterwards  as  to  the  place,  whether 
Philadelphia  or  Baltimore,  nothing  was  then  done  ;  but  the 
refidence  bill  pafled  foon  after.  Here  then  is  a  faff,  which 
completely  disproves  Hampden's  aflertion,  and  which  ought  to 
remove  from  the  minds  of  our  fellow-citizens  every  degree  of 
credit  to  the  afiertions  of  this  malignant  writer,  and  others  of  a 
fimihr  ftamp,  who  do  not  accompany  their  accufations  with 
proof. 

AND  I  have  not  only  deftrnyed  Hampden's  charge  againft 
Mr.  Adams,  of  having  uniformly  voted  in  the  fenate  againft  the 
opinion  of  the  reprefentatives,  but  have  produced  a  flrong 
inftance  to  (hew  that  Mr.  Adams  had  laid  it  down  as  a  rule,  to 
vote  with  the  reprefentatives,  in  cafes  of  equal  divifion  in  the 
ftrnate,  unlefs  his  judgment  was  very  clearly  and  ftrongly  con- 
vinced that  he  ought  to  vote  differently. 

I  COULD  produce  fome  other  inftances  of  his  having  pur- 
fucd  that  line,  but  one  pointed  cafe  was  fufficient  to  convift 


(     32     } 

:Harnpden  of  a  falls:  aiTcrljoij.     The  rcfut'i' 'on  of  this,  ana  the 
preceding  charges,  fo  pofitiv.:ly   :uade,    will  pv.t  the    good  ci 
tizens  of  this  country  on  their  guard  againii  iimiiar  charges 
produced   againft  Mr.   Adam& 

WHERE  did  Harnr.den  find  tl'j  fact  ?  If  in  the  journals  of 
the  fenate,  let  him  produce  the  c^ies.  for  they  are  all  ilateJ.  in 
the  journals:  if  .thoie  be  reforted  to,  I  a:n  convinced  as  ma- 
ny inftances  can  be  found  where  Mr.  Adams  voted  on  the  one 
fide  as  on  the  other.  Hearfay  and  mere  report  are  not  fuffi- 
cietit  grounds  of  condemnation  before  the  er lightened  tribu- 
nal «;f  the  public.  It  fcc-ms  to  be  the  peculiar  characicriilic 
r,f  ihotc,  who  il''e  themfelves  in  this  country,  the  exflitfi'oe 
piiriotS)  the  triic  democrats,  to  build  up  their  6  wn  reputation  on 
the  rui'.i  c.f  their  aaveriariesj  and  to  fupport  their  importance 
by  inceHar.t  detraction  and  the  moPi  barefaced  falfehcods.  Eat 
however  they  may  have  hitherto  maintained  feme  little  con- 
fequence  \vith  a  few  uninformed  citizens,  the  light  of  truth 
wiii  ere  long  di'.pcl  the  baneful  mills  of  calumny,  with  which 
they  have  enveloped  the  heft  men  among  us,  and  make  the fe  de- 
iigning  hypocrites  fkulk  back  into  their  native  obfcurity. 

IF  Mr.  :;s  fometimes  voted  differently  from  the  re- 

prefentativc-s,  it  is  to  be  fairly  prefumed  that  his  judgment  fo 
directed  him,  nor  can  it  be  inferred  that  in  fuch  cafes  he 
was  clearly  on  the  vwonry  fide  ;  when  fo  enlightened  a  body  as  the 
fenate  are  equally  divided,  the  queftion  will  be  allowed  to  be  a 
nice  one,  and  although  it  may  have  been  carried  in  the  reprc- 
fentatives,  yet  the  majority  there  may  have  been  frnall,  which 
indeed  we  know  to  have  been  ufually  the  cafe  in  important 
queftions. 

IT  by  no  means  follows,  as  Hampden  fuppofes,  "  that  the 
"  opinion  of  the  reprefentatives  muft  be  always  the  opinion  of 
"  the  people."  If  fo,  all  the  fenates,  all  the  qualified  nega- 
tives of  the  executives  ought  to  be  abclifned  :  the  afiertion  is 
a  libel  on  the  American  constitutions,  and  a  fevere  cenfure  on 
Mr.  Jefferfon's  doftrine,  for  he  calls  the  mere  will  of  the  repre- 
fentatives (unchecked  by  the  executive  or  fenate)  an  eleft'roe  ty- 
ranny, the  very  (!'"j;nl:ic;i  Gf  c^jpoi:fn^  If  Mr.  Adams  ought,  againft 
his  decided  judgment,  to  vote  with  the  reprefentatives  on  every 
equal  divifion  of  the  fenate,  that  body  would  foon  be  a  fuperfiu- 
ous  member  of  the  conditution,  and  the  confutation,  now  fo 
much  admired,  converted  into  an  cleclive  defpotiim. 

THE  univerfal  eft-blifliment  of  fenates  in  the  United  States, 
proves  however,  that  our  citizens  think  differently  from  Hamp- 
den on  this  fubjecl,  :.nd  their  frequent  approbation  of  the  ecu- 


(     33     ) 

du&  of  the  fenates  and  executives,  in  refitting  the  will  of  the 
representatives  (frequently  the  momentary  will  of  a  wicked  fac- 
tion,) proves  that  they  do  not  always  consider  their  will  as  the 
opinion  of  the  people.  No  a6l  of  the  Prefident's  whole  life 
has  been  more  grateful  to  the  citizens  of  America,  or  has  add- 
ed more  to  the  luftre  of  his  fame,  than  his  refilling  the  will  of 
the  reprefentatives  on  the  late  call  for  papers,  which  is 
now  viewed  throughout  the  union  in  its  true  light,  as  a  mea- 
fure*  of  party,  merely  defigned  to  anfwer  certain  views. 

HAMFDEN'S  reafoning  is  as  falfe  as  his  FACT  :  he  firft  af- 
fumes  a  fa&,  inconfiilent  with  truth,  and  then  argues  on  it  on 
principles,  totally  inconfiftent  with  the  principles  of  the  confti- 
tution  and  of  public  freedom,  and  in  direct  oppofition  to  the 
principles  of  his  friend,  Jcfferfon. 

AMONG  the  other  merits  of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  as  Hated  by 
Hampden,  we  find  "  his  attachment  to  the  CIVIL  and  RELI- 
GIOUS rights  of  his  fellow-citizens  :'*  for  the  proof,  we  arc 
referred  to  his  'writings  and  PUBLIC  CONDUCT. 

WE  have  feen  a  few  fpecimens  of  his  writings  ;  from  them 
we  may  infer  a  pretty  ilrong  difpofition  to  entrench  on 
fome  of  the  civil  rights  of  his  fellow-citizens,  particularly  in 
his  project  of  a  fenate,  which  would  undoubtedly,  on  his  plan, 
eftablifh  an  ar'ijlocracy^  very  injurious  to  the  rights  of  the  poof 
clafs  of  his  fellow-citizens. 

BUT  the  proof  of  a  Heady  attachment  to  the  civil  rights  of 
one's  fellow-citizens  ought  hot  to  reft  merely  on  'writings  ;  thi* 
attachment  ought  to  be  evinced  by  public  conduct  by  aftion,  and 
in  times  rf  danger  ;  then  the  hazarding  of  perfonalfafely  for  the 
prefervation  of  our  civil  rights  is  the  higheil  teftimony  of  pa- 
triotifm.  There  is  no  great  merit  in  cosnpofing,  in  the  cabinet, 
in  feafons  of  tranquillity,  effays  on  civil  rights,  which  are  fre- 
quently done  to  obtain  popularity,  and  without  any  rifle  of  per- 
fonal  inconvenience. 

IT  appears,  however,  that  Mr.  Jefferfon,  has  generally 
facrificed  the  civil  rights  of  his  countrymen  to  his  own  per- 
fonal  fafety.  We  are  told,  in  a  public  addrefs,  by  Mr. 
Charles  Simms,  of  Virginia,  who  mufl  have  been  well  ac- 
quainted with  the  circumilance,  "  that  Mr.  Jefferfon,  when 
governor  of  Virginia,  abandoned  the  trujl  with  which  he  wa» 
charged,  it  the  moment  of  an  invafion  by  the  enemy,  by 
which  great  confufion,  lofs  and  dtftrefs  accrued  to  thejlate,  ia 

E 


(     34     > 

the  ddbru&ion  of  public  records  and  vouchers  for  general  ex- 
penditures, -j* 

Now  here  was  a  period  of  public  danger,  when  Mr.  Jeffer- 
fon's  attachment  to  the  civil  rights  of  his  countrymen  might 
have  fhone  very  confpicuoufly,  by  facing  and  averting  the  dan- 
ger ;  here  would  have  been  a  iine  opportunity  for  him  to  have 
difplayed  his  public  fpirit  in  bravely  rallying  round  the  ftandard 
of  liberty  and  civil  rights  ;  but,  though  in  times  of  fafety,  he 
could  rally  round  the  itandard  of  his.  friend,  Tom  Paine,  yet 
\vhen  real  danger  appeared,  \\\z  governor  of  the  ancient  dominion 
dwindled  into  the/c<?r,  timid  philofophe r,  and  inftead  of  rallying 
his  brave  countrymen,  he  fled  for  fafety  from  a  few  light-horfe- 
men,  and  fiiamefully  abandoned  his  truflf  !  ! 

AGAIN,  when  the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  the  United 
States  were  in  extraordinary  peril,  when  it  required  the  exer- 
tions and  talents  of  the  wifeil  and  braveil  ftatefmen  to  keep  the 
federal  ihip  from  foundering  on  the  rocks  with  which  me  was 
encompaffed,  he,  when  his  aid  was  moft  effential,  abandoned 
the  old  helmfman  ;  and,  with  his  wonted  caution,  fneaked  a- 
way  to  a  fnug  retreat,  leaving  others  to  buffet  with  the  ftorm, 
and  if  they  were  caft  away,  to  bear  all  the  obloquy  and  public 
difgrace  which  would  follow. 

Kow  different  was  the  conducl  of  the  fpirited  and  truly  pa- 
triotic HAMILTON  ?  He  wiihed  to  retire  as  much  as  the  philo- 
tbpher  of  Montecelli  ;  he  had  a  large  family,  and  his  little  for- 
tune was  fall  melting  away  in  the  expensive  metropolis,  but  with 
a  -Roman's  fpirit,  he  declared  "  that,  much  as  he  wifhed  forre- 
•*  tirement,  yet,  he  would  remain  at  his  pofl,  as  long  as  there 
"  was  any  danger  of  his  country  being  involved  in  war."  How 
different  the  conduct  of  the  great  WASHINGTON?  He  tells 
us,  that  he  had  refolved  to  retire  before  the  laft  election,  but 


manner  again,  under  lika  cucunijtances  * 

J  Thisi  h  a  i;e  ha?  bft-n  attempted  to  he  j;ot  rid  of  by  producing  a  vote  of'ihe  AHein- 
hly  of  Viiginia,  after  an  enquiry  into  his  conduct,  ruknow!et!<tiri(T  his  utility  aiKi  it,- 
tegrity,  l/ut  altogether  lilent  on'  his  ivxnt  cf  firtnnejs,  vhicli  had  been  the'  caufe  of 

Ttr 


It  was  natural  for  his  friends  in  the  Afii-mblyto  varnifh  over  the  bufinefs  ns  well 
as  they  ciiuld.  and  the  clanger  being  palt,  there  t>«4ng  no  prof|:ect  of  his  being  again 
(  xpoied  in  that  ilation,  and  'his  flifhc  procecdin",  not  from  any  criminality,  but  from 
a  lonllitntional  weak'  <•£>  of  nerves,  it  was  no  difi:ctilt  matter  to  get  fiith  a  vote  throngli 
t  lie  aHembly,  men  c  *  (pecially  as  tlie  ttau'd  I'.'cr  of  tlie  It  (tie  was  no  !el''-  implicated  in  :!,e 
buflticCi  Utah  thut  of  Uw  gtivernoi  . 


(     35     ) 

the  then  perplckeifaxiA  criticaj  tituation  of  the  country  forbad 
fiich  a  itep.  How  different  was  even  Jffirfon  hlmfelj,  when 
calmly  and  fafely  writing  his  Notes  on  Virginia,  from  what  he 
was  wh-Mi  called  upon  to  aft  in  times  of  peril  ?  in  his  Notes, 
page  135,  in  reprobating  the  proportion  made  in  the  Virginia 
aflembljj  to  appoint  a  dictator,  he  exclaims,  "  Was  this  moved 
on  a  flip  po  fed  right  in  the  movers  of  abandoning  their  pojh  in  a 
nri '-mat  of  d''Jlrefs  ?  Our  laws  forbid  the  abandonment  of  our  pojls, 
even  on  ordinary  occajions." 

WHETHER  Mr.  Jefferfon/or^kw  the  tveftsrn  i"fnrrecllont  and 
either  confcious  of  his  want  of  courage  or  capacity  to  ac~t  on  fo 
trying  an  occafion,  or  of  his  good  wifhes  towards  fame  of  the 
promoters  of  it,  we  will  not  determine  ;  but  it  is  our  duty  to 
Hate  fom-j  facts  ;  th*  comments  on  them  will  be  left  to  a  dii- 
cerning  public. 

IT  is  certain  that  Mr.  Jefferfon  refigned  the  office  of  fecre- 
tary  of  ilatc  in  January  or  February  i  794,  and  that  the  infur- 
recliou  broke  out  the  July  following,  having  manifefted  threat- 
ening fyrnptoms  fome  months  before.  Citizen  Fauchct,  of 
glorious  memory,  in  his  intercepted  letter,  (which  caufed  the 
difmimon  of  citizen  Randolph,  alfo  of  glorious  memory,  the 
virtuous  author  of  the  precious  confeflionst)  has  the  following 
pafiage — "  Mr.  Randolph  came  to  fee  me  with  an  air  of  great 
eagernefs,  and  made  to  me  the  overtures  of  which  I  have  given 
you  an  account  in  my  No.  6. — Thus  withfortfe  thousands  rf  dol- 
lars, the  republic  (of  France)  could  have  decided  on  CIVIL 
WAR,  or  on  peace  !  thus  the  confciences  of  th^  pretended  pa- 
triots of  America  have  already  their  prices  !  What  will  be  the 
old  age  of  this  government,  if  it  is  thus  -early  decrcpld  !  Still 
there  are  patriots,  of  whom  I  delight  to  entertain  an  idea 
worthy  of  that  impofing  title.  CONSUL!  M?r.roe-\9  he 
is  of  this  number  :  he  had  apprized,  me  of  the  men,  whom  the 
current  of  events  had  dragged  along  as  bodies  devoid  of 
weight  :  bis  friend  Madifon  13  alfo  an  honeft  man  :  ^fejj'erfon, 
on  whom  the  patriots  caft  their  eyes  to  fuccoed  the  PrditL-n' , 
HAD  FORESEEN  THESE  CRISES  :  he  prudently  r,v 
tired  in  order  to  avoid  making  a  figure  AGAINST  HIS  IN- 
CLINATION in  fcenes,  the  fecret  of  which  will  foon  or  late 
be  brought  to  light." 

WE  are  informed  by  the  newfpapers  that  Randolph  has  lecn 
to  ii'i/it  Mr.  jfefferfon,  and  has  announced  his  determination  to 

t  Cit;z'n  Monroe,  lately  recalled  by  the  Prefidcnt  fhnn  France,  not  I  i>;-cfum'-  for 
his  '>rvv?>  t.< -he  IT  tire.l  States,  and  not  nr 'uis  rfq>iHt  :  podi-flrd  »('  a  pilarin  Pnii 
worth  former!?  101,000  guineas  Caiul  for  the?  purcha  IV  of  which  lie  was  abuled  in  a 
Paris newl'paper)  it  is  not  probable  he  wifhed  to  return  quite  fofjj  n. 


fervc,  if  elected  president ;  he  has  not  yet  announced  his  o,wn 
determination  to  return  to  his  former  fecretaryfhip,  if  his 
friend  mould  be  prefident  :  but  his  aclhity  in  canvajpng  for 
him  leaves  no  room  for  doubt,  as  to  his  ivlfkes  and  expectations  : 
it  is  apprehended,  however,  by  fome  of  the  friends  of  both 
thefe  characters,  that  a  lete  legal  call  on  one  of  them,  for  the 
immediate  fettlement  of  feme  accounts  and  balances,  will  prove 
highly  injurious  to  both.f 

Having  adverted  to  thefe  two  ftriking  inftances  of  Mr.  Jef- 
ferfon's  abandonment  of  bis  tnft  at  very  critical  moments^  I 
cannot  omit  the  following  fenfible  remark  of  Mr.  Charles 
Simnu — -"  Thefe  inftances,  he  obferves,  mew  Mr.  JefFerfon 
"  to  want  jirmnefs ,  and  a  man,  who  mall  once  have  abandoned 
<e  the  helm  in  the  hour  of  danger,  or  at  the  appearance  of 
"  a  tempeft,  feems  not  fit  to  be  trufled  in  better  times,  for  no 
"  one  can  know  ho<w  foon  or  from  'whence  ajlorm  may  come." 

THOSE  who  are  acquainted  with  Mr.  Adams's  public  con- 
duct, fiom  the  very  commencement  of  the  revolution,  can  bear 
witnefs  to  his  Jinn  and  Jleady  purfuit  of  his  patriotic  career, 
amidft  the  prokriptions  of  a  powerful  and  enraged  government, 
and  the  multiplied  dangers  which  threatened  him  at  various  pe- 
riods :  his  manly  and  independent  conduct  at  Paris  in  negoctat- 
ing  the  peace,  whereby  great  advantages  were  acquired  to  the 
United  States,  can  never  be  forgotten. 

WE  are  next  informed  of  Mr.  Jefferfon's  "  attachment  to 
"  the  RELIGIOUS  rights  of  mankind,"  and  art  referred  for  his 
fentiments  refpecting  religious  liberty  to  his  writings,  his  con- 
dutf,  and  particularly  to  the  "  aft  ejlablifiing  religious  freedom ," 
drawn  up  by  him. 

HAMPDEN  would  have  acted  more  wifely,  and  more  con- 
formably, I  am  perfuad.  d>  to  the  wifhes  of  his  patron,  had 
he  pafied  over  this  tender  fubject  in  faience.  It  was  certainly 
indifcreet  to  mention  Thomas  Jefftrfo*  and  religion  in  the  fame 
paragraph  of  an  eulogy  -^Religious  freedom  and  freedom  from 
religion  are  now  become  convertible  terms  with  moft  modern 
philotcphers,  particularly  thofe  who  have  been  educated  in 
the  philofophical  fcbools  of  France.  Mr.  JefFerfon  has  been 
heard  to  fay,  fir.ce  his  return  from  France,  that  the  men  of 
letters  and  philofophers  he  had  met  with  in  that  country,  were 
generally  At^ijls.  The  late  impious  and  blaiphemous  works 
of  Thomas  Paine,  reviling  the  chriflian  religion,  have  been 
much  applauded  in  France,  and  have  been  very  induftrioufly 
circulated  in  the  United  States,  by  all  that  clafs  of  people, 
who  are  friendly  to  Mr.  Jeficrfon's  politics,  and  anxioufly  de- 

f  Edmund  Randolph  is  <ued  by  the  Comptroller  of  tin?  Trea fury  for  a  deficitncy  in 
while  Secretary  offiate,  of  50,000  dollar*. 


(     37     ) 

ftrous  of  his  ele&ion  to  the  prefidency.  Mr.  Jefferfon's  friend- 
fliip  for  Paine  has  been  already  mentioned  ;  that  anti-chriftian 
writer  had  apartments  at  Citizen  Monroe's  at  Paris,  and  mould 
Mr.  JefFerfon  be  Prefident,  there  is  no  doubtTom  would  return 
to  this  country,  and  be  a  confpicuous  figure  at  the  Prefident's 
table  at  Philadelphia,  where  this  enlightened  pair  of  philofo- 
phers  would  fraternize,  and  philosophize  againft  the  chriftlan 
religion,  and  all  religious  ivorjliip. — Whatever  new  lights  Jef- 
ferfon  may  have  acquired  in  France,  it  is  certain  that  he  had 
naturally  very  good  pre-difpofitions  on  the  fubje<ft  of  religion. 
In  \ii&  Notes  on  Virginia,  page  169,  in  difcufliag  the  fubjecl 
of  religious  freedom,  he  makes  this  witty  obfervation — "  It 
"  docs  me  no  injury  for  my  neighbour  to  fay  there  are  twenty 
"  gods,  or  no  god  ;  it  neither  picks  my  pocket  nor  breaks  my 
"  leg  ;  if  it  be  laid,  his  teftimony  in  a  court  of  juftice  cannot 
"  be  relied  on,  reject  it  then,  and  be  the  ftigma  on  him."  In 
page  170,  he  fays,  "  millions  of  innocent  men,  women  and 
"  children,  fince  the  introduction  of  chriftianity,  have  been  burnt, 
"  tortured,  fined  and  imprifoned."  In  page  171,  fpeaking  of 
the  (late  of  religion  in  Pennfylvania  and  New- York,  he  fays, 
"  religion  there  is  well  fupported,  of  various  kinds  indeed, 
"  but  all  good  enough  }  all  fufficient  to  preferve  peace  and  or- 
«  dcr." 

WHICH  ought  we  to  be  the  mod  mocked  at,  the  levity  or 
the  impiety  of  thefe  remarks  ?  "  it  does  me  no  injury,  if  my 
"  neighbour  is  AN  ATHEIST,  becaufe  it  does  not  break  my 
'*  leg  !"  What  ?  do  I  receive  no  injury,  as  a  member  of  fo- 
ciety,  if  I  am  furrounded  with  atheilts,  with  whom  I  can 
have  no  focial  intercourfe,  on  whom  there  are  none  of  thofe 
religious  and  facred  ties,  which  reftrain  mankind  from  the  per- 
petration of  crimes,  and  without  which  ties  civil  fociety  would 
loon  degenerate  into  a  wi  etched  ftate  of  barbarifm,  and  be 
ftained  with  fcenes  of  turpitude,  and  with  every  kind  of  atro- 
city ?  Good  God  !  is  this  the  man  the  patriots  have  caft  their 
eyes  on  as  fucceffor  to  the  virtuous  WaJInngton,  who,  in  his 
farewell  addrefs,  fo  warmly  and  affe&ionately  recommends  to 
his  fellow-citizens,  the  cultivatiou  of  religion.  Contraft  with 
the  above  frivolous  and  impious  pauage  -j-  the  following  digni- 
fied advice  from  that  true  patriot  ;  "  of  all  the  difpofitions  and 
'*  habits,  which  lead  to  political  profperity,  religion  and  mora- 
"  lity  are  indifpenfible  fupports.  In  vain  would  that  man  (he 
"  feems  to  point  at  Jefferfon  !)  claim  the  tribute  of  patriotism, 

f  Contraft  even  an  obfervation  of  his  own  in  one  of  his  letters,  already  referred  to, 
where  he  fays,  ««  the  dewlararion  that  religious  faith  (hall  be  unpunifhed,  does  not  give 
"impunity  to  criminal  afts  diftatedby  religious  errors."  He  then  believed  that  reli- 
gious error  would  produce  criminal  acis  land  yetrfligifus  error  Aoei  no  injury  to  ft- 
cfety  .'  abfurd  and  inconfiltejit  vvi  irci  .' 


"  who  fhould  labor  to  fubvert  thefe  great  pillars  of  human 
"  happinefs,  thekjjrmeft  props  of  the  duties  of  men  and  citizens. 
•*  The  mere  politician,  equally  with  the  pious  man,  ought  to 
"  refpe£t  and  to  cherifb  them.  A  volume  could  not  trace  all 
"  their  connexions  with  private  and  public  felicity. 

"  LET  it  fimply  be  afked  where  is  the  fecurity  for  proper- 
"  ty,  for  reputation,  for  life,  if  the  fenfe  of  religious  obligation 
"  defert  the  oaths>  which  are  the  inftruments  of  inveftigation  in 
"  courts  of  juftice  ?  And  let  us,  with  caution,  indulge  the 
"  fuppofition  that  MORALITY  can  be  maintained  WITHOUT 
"  RELIGION.  Whatever  may  be  conceded  to  the  influence  of 
"  refined  education  on  minds  of  peculiar  ftru6ture,  reafon 
"  and  experience  both  forbid  us  to  expert  that  NATIONAL 
"  MORALITY  can  prevail  in  exclufion  of  RELIGIOUS  ^RINCI- 
"  PLE.  'Tis  fubllantially  true,  that  virtue  or  morality  is  a  nc- 
"  ceflary  fpring  of  popular  government..  JThe  rule  indeed  ex- 
"  tends  with  more  or  lefs  force  to  every  fpecies  of  free  govern- 
"  ment.  Who  that  is  afincere  friend  to  it  can  look  with  indif- 
"  ference  upon  attempts  tofoake  the  foundation  of  the  fabric  ? — 
"  Can  it  be,  that  Providence  has  not  conne&ed  the  permanent 
"  felicity  of  a  nation  with  it's  virtue  ?  The  experiment,  at 
"  lead,  is  recommended  by  every  fentiment,  which  ennobles 
"  human  nature  ;  alas  !  is  it  rendered  impofiible  by  its  vices  ?" 

WHAT  fublime  fentiments,  what  admirable  advice  !  How 
muft  it  fink  in  our  eyes  the  pretended  philofopher,  who  could 
attempt  to  degrade  the  Chriilian  religion  by  charging  to  it  the 
murder  of  millions,  who  could  view  with  fuch  indifference  the 
many  alarming  innovations  on  the  mild  and  fimple  religion  of 
our  forefathers  ?  "  There  are  religions,  of  various  kinds  indeed, 
fays  our  philofopher,  BUT  ALL  GOOD  ENOUGH." 

GOOD  enough  indeed  for  him,  who  eftablifhed  and  patronized 
a  rrewfpaper,  one  object  of  which  was  to  revile  Chrijlianity  !  It 
is  not  forgotten,  that  the  National  Gaxette,  publifhed  by  a  clerk 
in  the  department  of  ftate  and  under  the  aufpices  ofthefecretaryj 
loft  no  convenient  opportunity  of  making  a  mockery  of  reli- 
gionf ,  and  vilifying  the  clergy  of  the  country. 

IT  is  well  obferved  by  a  modern  writer,  "  that  patriotifm,  as 
a  moral  principle  attaching  itfelf  to  political  fociety,  depends, 
like  every  other  moral  principle,  on  its  relation  to  religion.  The 
Creator  of  man  has  bound  the  focial  to  the  divine  virtues,  and 


f  See,  amon^  various  irfhince^,  the  jftth  number  of  the  National  Ga/.^tte,  where  the 
belief  o)f  a  Prnvi'ienf.e  is  treated  as  an  impious  tenet.  In  Hie  time  uj-'  Rohe f'piei  re,  ;i 
irrm'.iT  of  the  convention  \vho  had  iinro-tured  ir.to  his  f,>eerlV  the  word  P»uvj(k!n;e, 
was  talk-d  to  order,  by  the  cry  of  Point  de  Providence,  no  Providence. 


(     39     ) 

made  our  devotion   and  our  reverence  to  himfelf,  the  ground 
work  of  our  duties  to  our  brethren  and  to  our  country." 

THE  aft  for  ejlablijhing  religious  freedom,  in  Virginia,  (the 
nccejjity  for  which  is  not  very  obvious,)  has  been  much  extolled 
by  Mr.  Jefferfon's  panegyriils.  I  alk  them,  what  good  effects 
has  it  produced  ?  Does  religion  flourifli  in  Virginia  more  than 
it  did,  or  more  than  in  the  eaftern  ftates  ?  Is  public  worfhip 
better  attended  ?  Are  the  minifters  of  the  gofpel  better  fup- 
ported,  than  in  the  eaftern  ftates  ? 

THAT  act,  which  is  nearly  all  preamble,  fetting  forth  a  feries 
of  ^j^dples,  fome  of  which  are  proved  by  late  experience  in 
France  to  be  very  quejl'ionable,  has,  in  my  opinion,  an  immediate 
tendency  to  produce  a  total  difregard  to  public  worfhlp,  an  abfo- 
lute  Indifference  to  all  religion  whatever.  It  ftates,  among  other 
things,  "  that  we  ought  not  to  be  obliged  to  fupport  even  the 
minifters  o£  our  own  religious  perfuafion,  and  that  our  civil 
rights  have  no  more  dependance  on  our  religious  opinions  than 
on  our  opinions  in  phyfic  or  geometry  ;"  the  act  then  declares, 
"  that  no  man  'mail  be  compelled  to  frequent  or  fupport  any  re- 
ligious worjk'ip  or  mimjlcr  whatever,  and  that  all  men  (hall  be 
free  to  profefs,  and  by  argument  to  maintain,  their  opinions,  in 
matters  of  religion,  without  diminishing  their  civil  capacities." 

I  WILL  not  accufe  Mr.  Jefferfon  of  having  been  influenced 
by  fe-'fi/b  views,  in  getting  this  act  pafled  ;  but  thofe  acquaint- 
ed with  his  conduct  and  opinions  will  agree  with  me,  that  he  has 
fully  taken  advantage  of  every  tittle  of  the  preamble  and  enac- 
ting claufe  :  he  has  by  his  conduct  proved  his  religious  free- 
dom, or,  rather,  his  freedom  from  religion  ;  and,  by  his  opini- 
ons, his  right  to  maintain  by  argument  any  doctrine  whatever, 
in  matters  of  religion.  Who  ever  faw  him  in  a  place  of  wor- 
ihip  ?  The  man  who  can  fay  he  has  feen  fuch  a  phenomenon,  is 
himfelf  a  much  -greater  curioiity  than  the  elephant  now  travel- 
ling through  the  fouthern  ftates. 

BUT  how  inconfiftent,  not  only  with  truth,  but  with  them- 
felves,  are  thefe  vifionary  philofophers,  who  are  thus  always 
ftriking  out  fo*ne  new  doctrine  ?  The  preamble  ftates,  that  our 
civil  rights  have  no  dependance  whatever  on  our  religious  opini- 
ons ;  and  yet  it  immediately  after  admits,  that  religious  opinions 
may  break  out  into  overt  afts  againft  peace  and  good  order  ;  and 
yet  the  letter  juft  quoted  fpeaks  of  criminal  atts  dlcJated  by  reli- 
gious error  ! 

WHAT  a  conformity  do  we  find  between  the  fentiments  of 
Mr.  Jefferfon,  in  matters  of  religion,  and  thofe  of  Tom  Paine  ? 
WJiere  is  the  wonder,  then,  if  the  works  of  the  latter  are  circu- 
lated with  fo  much  zeal  by  the  friends  of  the  former  ?  Tom 


(     4°     ) 

Paine  has  ridiculed  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  reprobated  pub- 
lic worfhip.  Tom  Jefferfon  hafc  attempted  to  diiprove  the  de- 
luge— has  made  it  a  queftion  whether  the  Almighty  ever  had 
a  chofen  people,f  and  has,  by  example  and  precept,  dij "countenanc- 
ed public  ivorJJjip.  Such  is  the  Chief  Magiftrate  whom  the 
patriots  of  citizen  Fauchet  have  fele£ted  for  the  United  States  !  ! 
Such  the  kindred  philoiophers,  whofe  /  eiv  lights  are  to  be  dif- 
feminated  throughout  America,  under  the  aufpices  of  the  Chief 
Magiftrate  of  the  Union  J  ! 

THE  opinions  of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  relative  to  the  prefent  conjli- 
tution  of  the  United  States,  are  next  in  order  to  be  confidered. 


IF  he  is  not  antifederal,  it  will  not  be  denied  that  he  enl 
tained    very     cotjiderable    objections    to    the    conftitution, 
that    his  advice  to  call  afecond  convention,  if  purfued,  would 
have  prevented  our  having  ever  obtainedyp  g ood  a  conjlitution. 

SOME  of  his  opinions,  relative  to  the  conilitution,  are  to  be 
found  in  a  feries  of  letters,  written  from  Paris,  in  the  years 
1788  and  '89.  Partial  extra&s  from  thele  letters  were  pub- 
limed  in  1792,  by  a  friend  of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  as  a  vindication  of 
his  federalism.  How  far  they  eilablifhed  it,  will  now  appear. 

IN  a  letter,  dated  2Oth  December,  1787,  after  exprefiing  his 
approbation  of  fome  of  the  features  of  the  new  conftitution, 
which  had  been  generally  approved  of,  and  which  he  could 
not  well  object  to,  he  fays,  "  I  will  now  add  what  I  do  not 
"  like  :  firft,  the  omiffion  of  a  bill  of  rights,  dec.  &c.  The 
"  fecond  feature  I  dijl'ikc,  and  greatly  diflike,  is,  the  abandon - 
"  ment,  in  every  irjtancc,  of  the  necejjity  of  rotation  in  office,  and 
"  mcjl  particularly  in  the  cafe  cf  the  Prejident.  Smaller  ob- 
4f  je&ions  are,  the  appeal  in  fa£t  as  well  as  law,  and  the  bidding 
*'  all  perfons,  legiflative,  executive,  and  judicial,  by  oath,  to 
**  maintain  that  corrftitution.  I  do  not  pretend  to  decide  what 
"  would  be  the  bed  method  of  procuring  the  eilabliihment  of 
*'  the  manifold  good  things  in  this  conilitution,  and  of  getting 
"  rid  of  the  bad.  Whether  by  adopting  it  in  hopes  of  future 
"  amendment,  or,  after  it  has  been  duly  weighed  and  canvafled 
"  by  the  people,  after  feeing  the  parts  they  generally  diflike, 
"  and  thofe  they  generally  approve,  to  fay  to  them,  "  we  fee 
"  now  what  you  wifh  :  fend  together  your  deputies  again  ;  let 
"  them  frame  a  corjlltution  for  you,  omitting  what  you  have  con- 
"  demned,  and  eflabli/hing  the  powers  you  approved."  Even  thefe 
*'  will  be  a  great  addition  to  the  energy  of  your  government. 


t  Not*";  on  Virginia,  p.  17;.    "  Thofe  who  labour  in  the  earth,  are  the  chcfsn  p 
pie  of  <Jod;  if  ever  he  had  a  chofen  feopte. 


> 


'*  At  all  events,  I  hope  you  will  not  be  difcouraged  from  other 
"  trials,  if  the  preient  one  fliould  fail  of  its  full  effects,  The 
"  late  rebellion  in  MafTachufetts,  has  given  mvrs  alarm  than  I 
"  think  it  mould  have  done.  Calculate,  that  one  rebellion  in 
"  thirteen  fates,  in.  .the  courfe  ot  I'/c'-vcn  years,  is  but  one  for 
"  eachjlate  in  a  century  and  a  half  :  nor  will  any  degree  of 
"  power  in  the  hands  of  government,  prevent  infurrections. 
"  France,  with  all  its  defpotifm,  and  two  or  three  hundred 
"  thoufarrd  men  in  arms,  has  had  three  infurreclions  in  the 
"  three  years  I  have  been  here  ;  in  every  one  of  which,  greater 
"  numbers  were  engaged  than  in  MafTachufctts,  aud  a  great  deal 
'•  more  blood  fpilt.  Compare  again  the  ferocious  depredations 
*'  of  their  iuf  irgents,  with  the  vrJer,  the  moderation,  and  the 
"  almoft  feu  extinguifhment  of  ours."  In  another  letter,  of 
f»th  of  July,  i  700,  he  fays,  "  I  am  glad  to  hear  the  new  confti- 
"  tution  is  received  with  favour  :  I  fmcerely  wifh,  that  the 
"  nine  firft  conjjknti-jns  may  receive,  and  the  four  lajl  reject  it. 
"  The  former  will  lecure  \lfnally,  while  the  latter  will  OBLIGE 
<;  them  to  offer  a  declaration  of  rights,  in  order  to  COMPLETE 
"  THE  UNION."  Iii  another  of  the  ^lilfame  month,  he  fays, 
'*  The  abandoning  the  principle  of  ntccflttry  rotation  in  the^- 
"  nate,  has,  I  fee,  been  difapproved  by  few  —  in  the  cafe  of  the 
"  P  refute;  :t,  by  none.  I  readily,  therefore,  fuppofe  my  opinion 
"  'zur  .,;•;£,  when  oppofed  by  the  majority,  as  in  the  former  in- 
"  fiance,  and  the  totality,  as  in  the  latter.'*  In  a  letter  of  the 
1  8th  November,  1788,  he  fays,  "  As  to  the  bill  of  rights, 
"  however,  I  ftill  think  it  mould  be  added  ;  and  I  am  glad  to 
"  fee,  that  three  Hates  have  at  length  confidered  the  perpetual 
"  re-eligibility  of  the  Prefident,  as  an  article  which  fliould  be 
<f  amended.  I  mould  deprecate  with  you,  indeed,  the  meet- 
"  ing  of  a  T.CW  can 


How  far  thefi  extra£ls  were  altered  or  mutilated,  is  liable  to 
qucfliur.,  from  the  manner  of  their  pppcnranci!.  It  is  obferva- 
ble,  that  the  extract  of  the  letter  of  tiie  6th  July,  though  it  was 
intended  as  part  of  the  one  which  is  mentioned  in  the  debates  of 
the  Virginia  convention,  docs  not  anfwer  to  the  defcripiton 
given  of  it  by  Mr.  Pendleton,  who  profeifes  to  have  feen  it  ?  for 
he  exprefsly  ilates,  with  regard  to  that  letter,  that  Mr.  JefFer- 
fon,  after  having  declared  his  v/iih,  fcfpeftirig  the  itTue  of  the 
deliberations  upon  the  conflitution,  proceeds  \.Qe:':nm?rate  the  a- 
mendments  which  he  iv't/ties  to  be  f?curcJ.  The  extract  which  was 
publifhed,  fpeaks  only  of  a  bill  of  rights,  as  the  efTential  amend- 
ment to  be  obtained  by  the  rcjeclicn  of  four  flares,  which  by 
no  means  agrees  with  the  account  given  of  it  by  Mr.  Pendleton. 

SUCH  ncverthelefs  as  they  are,  thefe  extracts  fully  prove, 
that  Mr.  Jefferfon  advifed  the  people  of  Virginia  to  adopt  the 

F 


(     4'     ) 

conjlituilon  or  not  to  adopt  it  upon  a  CONTINGENCY  ;  and  that 
he  was  OPPOSED  to  it  in  fame  of  its  nioft  IMVOHTAXT  features,  ib 
much  fo,  as",  at  firft,  to  DISCOUNTENANCE  its  ADOPTION  alto- 
gether, without  previous  amendments.  He  GREATLY  DISLIKED 
the  abandonment  of  the  principle  of  necejffary  rotation  in  every 
office,  and  mofl particularly  in  the  cafe  of  Fnfu^cnt :  he  wifhed  the 
principle  of  rotation  to  extend  not  onlv  to  the  executive,  but 
to  the  other  branches  of  the  government,  to  the  itnate,  at 
leaft,  as  is  explained  in  a  fubfequent  letter.  This  objection 
goes  to  the  VERY  STRUCTURE  of  the  government,  in  a  very 
IMPORTANT  ARTICLE,  and  while  it  juftifies  the  aiTertiorL-riiat 
he  was  oppofed  to  the  conftitution,  in  fome  of  its  ws/t  important 
features,  it  is  a  fpecimen  of  the  VISIONARY  SYSTEM  of  p-ii'acs 
of  its  author.  Had  it  been  confined  to  the  c  fiice  of  chief- 
magiftrate,  it  might  have  pretended  to  fome  little  plaufibility  ; 
by  being  extended  to  other  branches  of  the  government,  it  af- 
fumes  a  different  character,  and  evinces  a  ir.'ind prone  to  projetls, 
which  are  incompatible  with  the  principles  of  ft  able  government, 
and  difpofed  to  multiply  the  outworks,  while  it  leaves  the  citi- 
del  weak  and  totterl  g. 

ANY  perfon  acquainted  with  his  manner,  and  with  the  force 
of  terms,  will  not  hefitate  to  pronounce  that  he  wifhed  to  re- 
commend a  recurrence  to  a  fecond convention.  The  pains  which 
he  takes,  while  recommending  a  fecond  convention,  to  remove 
the  alarm  naturally  infpired  by  the  i>.fitrre8ion  in  Maflachufetts, 
which  had  recently  occurred,  are  a  ilrong  confirmation  of  this 
opinion. 

IT  is  not  eafy  to  underftand  what  other  object  his  comments 
on  that  circumllance  could  have,  but  to  obviate  the  anxiety 
which  it  was  calculated  to  infpire  in  the  people  for  an  adaption 
cf  the  conftitution,  without  a  previous  attempt  to  amend  it, 
and  to  remove  all  apprehenfion  of  internal  convnlfions  from  the 
dangerous  experiment  of  a  fecond  convention. 

WE  cannot  avoid  remarking,  by  the  way,  that  thofe  com- 
ments afford  a  curious  and  charatJer'iftic  fample  of  logic  and  calcu- 
lation. "  One  rebellion  in  thirteen  ftates,  in  the  courfe  of  ele- 
ven years,  is  but  one  for  each  ftate  in  a  century  and  a  half," 
while  France,  it  feems,  had  had  three  infurrections  in  three 
years.  In  the  latter  inilance,  the  fubdivifiom  of  the  entire  na- 
tion are  confounded  in  cne  mafs  ;  in  the  former,  \\-\Q fuldh-'ifions 
are  the  ground  of  calculation  ;  and  thus  a  rniferalle  fophifm  is 
gravely  made  a  bafis  of  political  ccnfolation  and  conduct  ;  for, 
according-  to  the  data  itated,  it  was  as  true  that  the  United 
States  had  had  one  rebellion  in  eleven  years,  endangering  their 
common  fafcty  and  welfare,  as  that  Frar.cc  had  had  three  infurrec- 
tions  in  three  years. 


(     43     ) 

Thus  it  appears  from  the  very  documents  pr  duccd  in  exculpa- 
tion of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  that  he  in  fact  difcountenanced  in  the 
firft  inftmce,  the  adoption  of  the  conftitution  in  its  primitive 
form,  favour!  >g  the  idea  of  an  attempt  at  previous  amend- 
ments by  afi'co  d  convention  ;  which  was  precifely  the  line  of  po- 
licy followed  by  all  tnofe  who  were  at  that  time  denominated 
A NTI FEDERAL,  aid  .vli' '»  '.iave  generally  fmce  retained  their  ori- 
ginal ENMITY  agair»it  the  confutation.  As  to  thofe  letters  of 
Mr.  Jefferfon,  which  nrz  fubfequent  to  his  knowledge  of  the  ra- 
lificaiim  of  the  conilitution  by  the  requijite  number  of  Jlates,  they 
prove  nothing,  but  tivit  he  was  willing  to  play  the  politician. 
They  can  'it  bell  only  be  received  as  expedient  acts  of  fubrnl/Jion 
to  the  opinion  of  the  majority,  which  he  profefied  to  believe 
infallible,  (  ''gning  to  it,  with  all  poflible  humility,  not  only 
his  con  duel,  but  hio  judgment,)  not  as  marks  of  approbati- 
on. 

IT  will  be  remarked  that  there  was  no  want  of  vcrfatlllty  in 
his  opinions  ;  they  kept  pace  tolerably  well  with  the  progrefs 
of  the  bu  (hi efs,  and  were  quite  as  accommodating  as  circumftan- 
ccs  feemed  to  require.-]-  On  the  3 1  ft  July  88,  when  the  adup- 
tio'i  of  the  conftitution  was  kno~V:i,  the  various  and  weighty 
objections  of  March  1/87,  had  rdolved  themfelves  into  the  fim- 
ple  want  of  a  bill  of  rights.  In  November  following,  on  the 
ftrength  of  the  authority  of  three  ftates  (overruling,  in  that 
inltance,  the  mixim  of  implicit  deference  for  the  opinion  of 
the  majority)  that  lately  folltary  defect  acquires  a  companion, 
in  a  revival  of  the  bbjeffio  i  to  the  re-elegibility  of  the  President. 
Andrtvo^/W  co  . MV  ithft,  which  had  appeared  no  very  alarming 
expedient,  while  the  entire  coijlitution  wxt  in  jeopardy,  became 
an  objed  to  be  aeprtcated,  when  partial  amendments  to  an  alrea- 
dy ejlabli/bed  co  Jllliitio'i  were  alo;e\\\  queftion. 

FROM  the  (ludluations  of  fentimcnt,  v/hich  appear  in  the 
extracts  that  have  been  publiihed,  it  is  natural  to  infer,  that 
had  the  whole  of  Mr.  Jefferfon's  correfpondence  on  the  fub- 
jectbeen  given  to  the  public,  much  greater  diveriities  would 
have  been  discovered. — But  in  order  to  determine  with  accu- 
racy whether  or  not  Mr,  JefFerfon  was  a  friend  to  the  confti- 
tution, we  mould  refer  to  his  opinions,  while  the  RESULT  was, 
DOUBTFUL,  and  not  to  his  opi  lions,  when,  after  its  adopti- 
on, his  Jlation  and  love  of  popularity  made  it  EXPEDIENT  to 
acquiefce  in  the  will  of  the  majority. 

IT  appears,  from  the  debates  in  the  convention  of  Virginia, 
that  Patrick  Henry ,  at  that  time  the  champion  of  the  antlfede- 
ral  party  in  Virginia,  quoted  Mr.  Jefferfon  s  opttiio.?.,  as  an 

tThe  Miriiifei-  at  Pa  is,  with  liis  wvitecl  political  f.i^adty,  might  well  calculate, 
i  l.at  the  nine  adopting  States  (in  Congrefs)  would  foon  recalla.n  aniifccieraiUf. 


(     44     ) 

AUTHORITY  for  REJECTING  the  cv~>jli[uli'jn.  Mr.  Pcndleton  at- 
tempted to  explain  away  Mr.  Jefferfon's  opinion  ;  he  Hated  it 
to  be  "  a  wilh  that  tnejirft  j.ine  co; ;v.>,' -'twas  might  accept  the 
44  conllitution,  becaufe  it  would  fecure  the  govt!  it  contained, 
"  and  that  ihe/fl.'-r  Lift  might  refufe  to  accept  ////  they  COM- 
"  PELI.KD  the  others  to  accept  certain  amendments."  Mr. 
Henry  replied,  "  the  gentleman  has  endeavoured  to  explain 
"  Mr.  Jefferfon's  opinion,  I  :to  an  advice  to  adopt.  Ke  wifh- 
"  es  nine  dates  to  adopt,  and  that  four  ftatcs  may  be  found 
"  fomewhere  to  reject  it.  Now,  if  we  purfue  his  advice^ 
ie  what  are  we  to  do  ?  To  prefer  form  to  fubftance  ?  Forgive 
*'  me  leave  to  afl-c,  what  is  the  SUBSTANTIAL  FART  0:Phii; 
<f  counfel  ?  It  is,  that  four  ftates  mould  REJECT  :  they  tell  u± 
"  that,  from  the  moft  authentic  accounts,  New-Hampfhirr 
"  will  adopt  it  ;  where  then  will  four  dates  be  found  to  reject, 
"  if  we  adopt  it  ?" 

What  fays  Mr.  Mad'tfon  in  reply  to  this — "  Is  it  come  to 
"  this  then  that  we  arc  rot  to  follow  our  own  rcafo"1.  ?  Is  it  pro- 
.'*  per  to  adduce  the  opinions  of  reipec~table  men,  not  within 
"  thcfe  walls  ?  If  the  opinion  of  an  important  character  were 
"  to  weigh  on  this  occafion,  could  we  not  adduce  a  character 
tl  equally  great  ON  OUR  SIDE  ?  Are  we  who  (in  the  gentle- 
"  man's  opinion)  are  not  to  be  guided  by  an  errl-ig  world, 
*'  now  to  SUBMIT  to  the  OPINION  of  a  citizen  beyond  the  at- 
<(  lantic  ?  I  believe,  that  ivcr?  that  gentleman  now  on  this 
"  floor,  he  wuld  be  for  the  adoption  of  this  conftitution  ;  i 
"  wifli  his  r?ame  had  never  lcc;i  mentioned  ;  I  wifli  every  thing 
"  fpoken  here  relative  to  his  opini.ny  may  be  SUPPRESSED,  if 
"  our  debates  fliould  be  publifiied.  I  am  in  fome  meafure  ac- 
"  quainted  with  his  fentiments  on  this  fubjedl  ;  it  is  not  right  for 
"  me  to  UNFOLD  ivhat  he  has  informed  me  ;  but,  I  will  venture 
"  to  aflert  that  the  claufe  new  dtf cuffed  is  not  objected  to  by 
>*  him." 

IT  is  obfcrvablc  that  Mr.  Madifon  neither  advocates  the  ac- 
curacy of  Mr.  Pendleton's  comment,  nor  denies  the  juftnefs  of 
that  of  Mr.  Henry  ;  his  folicittide  appears  to  be  to  deftroy 
the  INFLUENCE  of  what  he  impliealy  admits  to  be  the  opinion 
of  Mr.  yefferfon,  to  prefs  out  of  fight  the  authority  of  that 

.opinion,  and  to  get  rid  of  thefubjecl  as  fall  as  poffible. 

" 

HE  confefles  a  knowledge  of  Mr.  Jefferfon's  fentiments, 
but  prudently  avoids  d'ifclcfurc,  wrapping  the  matter  in  a  my- 
flerious  refervc.  Enough  however  is  feen  to  jullify  the  con- 
cluiion,  that  if  Mr.  Jefferfon's  adv ice  had  prevailed,  Viiginia, 
North-Carolii)a,  New- York  and  Rhode-Ifland,  would  have 
-then  thrown  themfelves  OUT  OF  THE  UNION.  And  whether. 


(     45     ) 

in  that  event,  they  would  have  been  at  this  day  re-umted  to  it, 
or  whether  there  would  be  now  any  union  at  a//,  is  happily  a 
fpeculation  which  need  only  be  purfued,  to  derive  from  it  the 
pleafing  reflections,  that  the  danger  <was  ivifsly  avoided,  by  not 
p:trfuing  Mr.  ^fffirfon's  advice. 


WE  may  now  fafely  pronounce  that,  while  the  conftitution  was 
DEPENDING  before  the  people  of  this  country,  for  their  con- 
lidcration  and  decifion,  Mr.  Jefferfon  was  OPPOSED  to  it  in 
fame  of  its  MOST  IMPORTANT  FEATURES,  that  he  wrote  his 
objections  to  fome  of  his  friends  (leading  and  influential  men) 
hi  Virginia,  and  at  frjl,  went  fo  far  as  to  DISCOUNTENANCE 
ITS  ADOPTION,  tho'  he  afterwards,  finding  it  received  in  the 
i  nited  States  with  favor,  recommended  it  on  the  ground  of  ex- 
pediency, in  certain  CONTINGENCIES. 

IT  may  be  added,  that  fome  of  his  obje8ionst  which  went  to 
the  VERY  STRUCTURE  of  the  PRINCIPAL  parts  of  the  govern- 
ment, have  not  been  REMOVED  by  the  amendments,  propofed 
by  Congrefs. 

WE  have  feen  that  \\\zfrft  ad-vice  given  by  Mr.  Jefferfon  to 
the  people  of  Virginia,  relative  to  the  conltitution,  was«c/  to 
adopt  it,  but  to  try  a  fecond  convention  ;  his  fulfequent  advice 
was,  to  adopt  or  not  ON  A  CONTINGENCY,  that  is,  to  adopt  if  /?*'«<r 
flat  es  had  not  previously  adopted,  to  reject,  if  that  number  of 
Hates  had  previoufly  adopted,  in  other  words,  to  rifque  an  ULTI- 
MATE DISMEMBERMENT  of  the  ilates  in  an  experiment,  to  obtain 
the  alterations  which  HE  deemed  neceffary.  On  examination, 
this  advice  will  be  found  as  pregnant  with  mifchief  to  the  Unit- 
ed State?,  as  it  was  abfurd  and  whimfical. 

IF  the  four  laft  deliberating  ftates  (particularly  if  they  had 
happened  to  be  dates  in  geographical  contiguity,  which  was 
very  poffible)  had  refufcd  to  ratify  the  conftitution,  what 
might  not  have  been  the  confequence  ?  Would  the  aj/cnting 
ilates  have  tamely  fuffered  themfelves  to  be  COERCED  into  the 
amendments,  which  the  diflenting  ftates  might  have  dictated? 
Could  any  thing  but  objections  to  the  conltitution  of  the  moll 
fetioas  kind  have  juilified  the  hazarding  an  eventual  fchifm  in 
the  unioM,  in  fo  great  a  degree  as  would  have  attended  the 
advice  given  by  Mr.  Jefferfon  :  Can  it  be  denied  that  the  per- 
fon  who  entertained  thefe  objections  was  STRONGLY  oppofedto 
the  conftltutlon  ? 

THE  opponents  of  the  conftitution  (or  the  anllfederarijls  as 
they  were  called)  acknowledged  like  Mr.  Jefferfon,  the  necefli- 
ty  and  utility  of  union,  and  generally  fpeaking,  that  the  con- 
contained many  valuable  features  ;  Me  him,  they  on- 


(     46     ) 

ly  contended  that  it  wanted  fome  effential  alterations,  to  ren- 
der ft  a  fafe  and  good  government  ;  like  him,  they  only  wanted 
a  fecond  convention,  to  alter  the  conftitution,  fo  as  to  remove 
all  the  objections  which  had  been  made,  by  what  they  called  the 
people,  but  in  truth,  by  a  few  factious  diforganizers  or  viiiona- 
ry  theorifts  in  the  feveral  ftates. 

IF  Mr.  Jefferfon's  advice  was  not  Dangerous,  it  certainly  was 
ridic ../GUS  in  the  extreme.  According  to  that  advice,  the  quef- 
tion  before  a  ftate  convention  would  not  have  been  on  the  me- 
rits or  demerits  of  the  conftitution,  but  the  only  queftion  would 
be,  in  what  numerical  order  the  jlaie flood  ?  If  me  werethc  ninth 
ftate,  then  it  was  unneceffary  to  difcufs  the  merits  of  the 'mftni- 
ment  ;  it  mult  be  adapted  at  all  events  ;  but  if  me  happened  to 
be  the  te  ,7/6,  it  mult  then  be  rejected  at  all  events,  without  any 
difcufilon.  It  would  have  been  fimply  neceffary  to  have  afcer- 
tained,  how  many  ftates  had  adopted,  which  fa&  being  known, 
the  adoption  or  rtjeti'ion  followed  of  courfe  ;  and  though  in  other 
cafea,  it  mould  feem  that  the  more  ftates  had  adopted  a  mea- 
fure,  the  ftronger  would  be  the  recommendation,  as  an  evidence 
of  the  approbation  of  the  people,  yet  in  this  cafe,  the  ingenious 
Jefferfon.  tvverfed  the  rule,  and  the  more  ftates  had  adopted,  the 
lefs  credit  ought  it  to  have  with  the  remainder. 

BUT  when  this  very  fage  advice  was  given,  it  happened  never 
to  occur  to  its  author,  that  two  conventions  might  be  in  fef- 
fion  at  the  fame  ti'ne,  and  that  either  of  them,  by  its  adoption, 
would  make  the  ninth  :  what  wns  to  be  done  in  this  dilemma  ? 
if  his  advice  was  proper  for  Virginia,  it  was  proper  for  all  the 
other  ftates,  how  would  they  fettle  the  etiquette,  which  was  to 
adopt  without  .mendments,  and  which  was  to  reject,  to  obtain 
them  ?  It  would  have  required  conferences  and  negociations,  in 
which  nvt  a  fyllable  would  have  been  faid,  refpecl.ing  the  merits 
of  the  conftitution;  but  the  whole  difcuffion  would  have  turned 
on,  which  ought  to  adopt,  to  complete  the  magical  number,  ;//w. 

If  the  eonteft  b.^.d  occurred  bet  ween  a  larcre  and  a  fmallftatc. 
Virginia  and  D'-!--r:ire,  for  inftance,  the  difpute  indeed  might 
eafily  have  been  fettled  ;  Virginia  would  fay,  do  you  adopt,  and 
we'll  drive  them  into  amendments  :  little  Delaware  would  not 
contend  with  the  ancient  dominion  :  But  a  ferious  difficulty 
would  have  arifen,  had  the  eonteft  been  between  Virginia  and 
Pennfylvania,  and  both  were  determined  to  adopt  or  reject  :  if 
no  compact  could  have  been  concluded  between  them,  I  cannot 
fee  how  Mr.  Jefferfon.  s  fcheme  could  have  operated  :  if  both 
refufed  to  adopt,  thtiv  would  not  have  be^n  the  tragic  number  ; 
if  both  determined  to  adopt,  then  ten  ftates  would  have  adopted, 
and  no  amendments  obtained. 


(     47     ) 


And  all  this,  thought  Mr.  Jefferfon,  might  be  accomplished 
with  eafe,  and  without  fchifm  !  Suppofe  the  four  largejl  Jlates, 
Virginia,  Pennfylvania,  Maffachufetts,  and  New- York,  had  re- 
jected the  conftitution,  and  infifted  upon  all  the  amendments 
which  their  feveral  conventions  required;  is  it  probable  that 
the  other  nine  ftates  would,  without  a  ftruggle,  have  relinquifh- 
ed  their  opinions,  and  been  brow  beat  into  a  ftring  of  amend- 
ments, which  they,  in  accepting  the  conftitution,  had  deemed 
frivolous,  unneceffary  or  dangerous  ?  or  on  the  other  hand,  had 
\\\z  four fmalhjl  Jlatis  withheld  their  confent,  in  order  to  coerce 
the  nine  others  into  amendments,  is  it  likely  the  latter  would 
have  been  fwayed,  by  any  apprehenfions,  to  alter  a  conftitu- 
tion, on  which  they  had  refted  their  hopes  of  future  happinefs  ? 

IN  reviewing  the  fentiments  of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  refpe&ing  the 
conilitution,  we  are  compelled  to  afcribe  the  contradictions  and 
abfurdities  they  diicover,  to  a  natural  unfteadinefs  of  principle, 
on  the  fubjed  of  government,  and  to  a  difpoiition,  which  is 
very  manifeft,  to  pleafe  both  parties,  unceitain  for  a  time, 
which  would  preponderate.  Thus  his  opinions,  like  fome  law 
cafes,  were  often  quoted  by  both  fides.  At  the  firft  appearance 
of  the  conftitution,  he  had  very  ferions  bjeftions  to  it — and  re-* 
commended  another  convention — when  he  found  that  it  was  like- 
ly to  be  adopted,  his  objeJlions  diminimed,  and  he  adviied  the 
adoption  by  nine  ftates — when  he  found  that  the  conftitution 
was  a  favorite  with  the  people,  then  his  objections  nearly  va- 
nifhed,  and  he  was  content  that  Congrefs\  iliould  recommend 
amendments  when  they  mould  be  found  neceffary,  he  deprecated 
another  convention. 

IF,  at  the  latter  ftage  of  the  bufinefs,  he  found  it  expedient  to 
acquiefce  in  the  will  of  the  majority,  it  remains  to  enquire,  whe- 
ther he  has,  fince  the  operation  of  the  federal  government,  con- 
tinued his  acquiefcence,  or  whether,  rinding  in  this  country,  on 
his  return  from  France,  a  party ,  unfriendly  to  that  government 
and  to  the  conftitution,  from  which  it  emanated,  his  former  en- 
mity has  not  broke  out  again,  and  difplayed  itielf  in  hoilile  acls, 
too  confpicuous  to  have  efcaped  notice  and  cenfure. 

To  prove  that  Mr.  Jefferfon  has  been  for  many  years  a  de. 
termined  opponent  of  the  federal  conftitution  and  of  the  mea. 
fures  which  have  flowed  from  it,  under  the  adminiftration  of 
Waihington,  I  will  now  proceed  to  mew  that  he  was  the  ifi/litu. 


t  In  his  letter  of  zSch  Au^iift,  17^9,  he  fay?,  fpcrk'/i'^  ;>f  a  Bill  of  Rights,  the  want  of 
which  he  ha<l  but  a    (hurt  time  before  viewed  as  a  ftit&l  defeii,*—"  Hswever,  if  we  tin 


not  have  it  now.  I  have  fo  much  confidence  in  my  countrymen,  as  to  be  Jati-fitdtliat  wr 
u  as  the  degeneracy  of  our  government  fliali  render  k  uecdlriry." 


ih  .H  have-  it,  as  Isuu  as  th 


(     48      ) 

tor  and  patron  of  the  National  Gazette,  publifhed  in  Philadelphia, 
the  oljcft  and  tendency  of  which  were  to  vilify  and  depreciate  the 
government  of  the  United  States,  to  mifreprefent  and  traduce  the 
admintftratioii  of  it  .(except  in  the  Jingle  department  of  which 
he  was  the  head)  implicating  in  the  inoft  virulent  cenfure  the 
majority  of  both  houfes  of  congrefs,  the  heads  both  of  the  trea- 
fury  and  war  departments,  and  fparing  not  even  the  chief  ma- 
gift  rale  himfelf ;  that  in  the  fupport  of  this  paper,  thus  hojlilt; 
to  tke  government,  in  the  adminiilration  of  which  he  held  fo  im- 
portant a  trull,  he  did  not  fcruple  to  apply  the  money  of  that  very 
government. 

THIS  charge  is  fupported  in  feveral  ways. 

i  ft.  By  dire  A  proof  of  an  OFFICIAL  connection  between  the  fe- 
cretary  ofjlate  and  the  editor  of  the  National  Gazette — a  little  an- 
tecedent to  \\&JirfteJlabliftMient  of  that  paper,  f 

2d.  By  direct  proof,  as  we  have  feen,  of  the  fecretary's  being 
oppofsd  to  the  preient  government  of  the  United  States,  while 
it  was  under  the  can/i^eralion  of  the  people. 

3d.  By  his  avowed  oppojitio'.i  to  the  PRINCIPAL  meafures 
which  have  been  adopted  in  the  courfe  of  its  adminiilration. 

As  to  the  connection  between  \\\tfecretary  ofjlate  and  the  editor 
of  the  National  Gazette,  neither  of  the  following  facts  can  or 
will  be  difputed. 

ift.  That  the  EDITOR  of  the  National  Gazette  was  a  CLFRK 
in  the  department  ofjlate  for  foreign  languages,  and  as  fuch, 
received  a  SALARY  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  a  year. 

2d.  That  he,  became  fo  antecedently  to  the  eflablilhment  of 
his  Gazette,  having  actually  received  his  falary  from  the  iyth 
of  Auguil,  »79r,  and  not  having  publifhed  the  mil  number  cf 
his  paper  till  the  3  i  il  October  following. 

c/J.  That  at  the  time  he  became  fo,  there  was  another  cha- 
racter, a  clerk  in  the  fame  department,  who  underftood  the 
French  language  ;  and  that  the  edilor  of  the  National  Gazette 
was  a  tra^Jlalor  of  that  language  only. 

4th.  That  the  appoinment  was  not  made  under  any  fpec'ml 
proviiion,  marking  out  a  particular  clerkihip  of  the  kind,  its  du- 
ties, or  its  emoluments  ;  but  under  a  general  authority  to  appoint 
clerks,  and  allow  them  falaries,  not  exceeding  the  average  of  five 
hundred  dollars  each. 


f  This  Editor  was  well  known  to  be  inimical  to  po&l  government,  having  been  a 
f -:\v  \e.>:  s  injure,  a  svriiet  in  a  papt-r,  called  tlie  Freea.an's  Journal,  the  chur:icter  of 
vhich  is  not  forgotten. 


(     49     ) 

5th.  That  the  editor  of  the  National  Gazette,  immed&fly  pre- 
ceding the  eftablifhment  of  that  paptr,  was  the  fuperintehdant 
or  conductor  of  a  paper  belonging  to  Guilds  and  Swaine,print- 
cd  at  New- York. 

TKECE  atetbefifis  :  the  conchifion  is  irrejijlille  :  the  fecret  in- 
tcvtio'-.s  of  .Tien  being  in  the  repofitories  of  their  own  breafts,  it 
rarely  happens,  and  is  therefore  not  to  be  expected,  that  direct 
and  pofitive  proof  of  ih>:m  can  be  adduced. 

PRESUMPTIVE  fails  and  circumftances  mud  afford  the  evi- 
dc  ice,  and  when  theie  ttc-fujfictenttyjh'Qr-gi  they  ought  to  decide. 

WE  find  the  bead  of  a  department  taking  the  editor  of  a  Ga- 
zstte  into  his  employment,  as  a  clerl;  with  a  fated  f alary  ^  not 
for  wfffpecidl  purpofe,  which  could  not  have  been  accomplished 
otherwife  ;  for  befidea  his  own  competency  to  tranflate  from 
the  French,  and  his  general  practice,  he  had,  at  the  time,  in  his 
department,  a  clerk,  who  was  capable  of  performing  the  •ueryfir- 
vice  required,  and  could,  without  difficulty,  have  procured 
others  fimiiarly  qualified  :  nor,  from  any  particular  neceffity 
arifingfrom  a  too  limited  allowance,  or  any  other  caufe  ;  for  he 
had  it  in  his  power  to  allow  an  adequate  compenfation  to  a  cha- 
racter who  might  have  been  regularly  attacked  to  the  department. 

THE  very  exigence  of  fuch  a  connection,  then,  is  alone  a  fuffi- 
cier.t  foundation  for  believing,  that  the  defign  of  the  arrange- 
ment was  to  fecure  an  influence  over  the  paper,  the  editor  of 
which  was  fo  employed.  But  the  circumftances  which  attend 
it,  explain  the  nature  of  it  beyond  a  doubt.  That  which 
has  been  juft  mentioned,  namely,  there  having  been  prcvlovfly 
a  clerk  in  the  department,  qualified  to  render  the  fervice,  is  a 
weighty  one.  The  coming  of  a  netv  printer  from  another 
ftate,  to  inftitute  a  new  paper — his  having  been  appointed  a 
clerk  in  the  department  prior  to  his  removal  to  this  city — hi* 
having  been  compen fated  before  he  was  even  prefent  to  fatisfy 
the  appearance  of  rendering  fervice  ; — thcfe  clrcumjlanccs  give  a 
point  and  energy  to  the  language  of  the  trartfaEiion,  which  ren- 
der it  unequivocal.  There,  perhaps,  never  was  a  moreJUmfy 
covering  for  ihepenfioning  of  a  printer.  Some  ojlen/tble  ground  for 
giving bim  tie  public  momy  was  necefiary  to  be  contrived.  The 
clerk/kip  of  foreign  languages  was  deemed  a  platifible  pretext :  but 
no  man  acquainted  with  human  nature,  or  with  the  ordinary 
ivilcs  of  politics!  intrigue,  can  be  deceived  by  it. 

THE  medium  of  iiegc,c'uihon  between  his  friend,  the  ftcrefary 
of  Jlate,  and  Mr.  Freneau,  in  order  to  the  ipftitution  of  his 
paper,  is  well  known,  and  documents  are  pofiefied  which  af- 
csrtain  the  perfon  ;  but  they  are  withheld,  from  particu- 

G 


lar  coniideraticns-  Thefc  are  the  more  readily  yielded  to,  be- 
caufe  the  facts  which  have  been  Mated,  render  it  unnecejjary  to 
exhibit  them.  Thofe  facts  mull  prove,  to  the  fatisfaction  of 
every  impartial  mind,  that  Mr.  Jffirfon  was  the  INSTITUTOR 
and  PATRON  of  ths  National  Gazette. 

THE  complexion  and  tendency  of  that  Gazette,  are  fnf- 
ficiently  known.  There  was  no  man  who  loved  the  govern- 
ment, or  was  a  friend  to  the  public  order  and  tranquillity, 
but  reprobated  it  as  an  incendiary  and  pernicious  publication, 
and  condemned  with  indignation ,  the  aufpices  by  which  it  was 
fupported, 

IT  is  unnecefTary  to  add,  what  is  equally  well  known,  that 
this  incendiary  paper  expired  about  the  time  of  Mr.  Jefferjon's 
retirement  from  office. 

HAVING    traced  and  afcerta'med  the  improper  connection  which 
exifted  between  Mr.   Jefferfon,  while  fecret  <ry  of  Jlate,  and  the 
editor   of  the  National  Gazette,  it  will  not  be  ill-timed    to   call . 
the  public  attention  to  fome  fpecimens  of  i\\tfpirit  and  difpofiti- 
on  by  which  that  Gazette  was  influenced. 

WE  all  remember  the  alarming  Jituation  of  this  "country  in 
the  fummer  of  1793,  w^en  the  Prefidmff  proclamation,  fnp- 
ported  by  his  energy  and  Jirmnefs,  and  by  the  good  ienfe  of  an 
enlightened  nation,  maintained  our  neutrality,  and  faved  us  from 
twar,  in  fpiteofthe  perfevering  efforts  of  a  hod  of  foreign  and 
domej.ic  incendiaries. 

MR.  Jefferfon  is  applauded  by  Hampden  for  having  been 
'*  an  enthu/iajlic  admirer  of  the  French  revolution,  without  how- 
cver  furrendering  the  independence  and  f elf -government  of  America 
even  to  forward  that  glorious  eaufe  ;  "  for  the  proof  of  which 
he  refers  to  the  fecretary  of  date's  letter  to  Mr. Morris,  then  our 
minifter  at  Paris,  counteracting  Genet's  intrigues  and  demanding 
his  recall. — Wonderful  forbearance  and  moderation  truly  in  the 
entbujiajtic  fecretary  not  to  furrender  the  independence  and  J "elj '-go- 
vernment of  his  oiun  country,  to  forward  the  glorious  caufe  of 
another  !  !  ! 

BUT  the  real  fentiments  and  wifhes  of  the  fecretary  of  ftate 
are  to  be  looked  for  in  the  publications,  which  iflued  from  a 
prefs,  of  which  he  was  the  inflitutor  and  patron,  and  from  the 
pen  of  an  editor,  who  w&s penjioned by  him. 

THE  ojtenfibie  writings  of  the  mere  organ  of  the  executive 
will,  after  the  public  fentiment  had  become  too  unequivocal  to  be 
miilaken,  are  not  fufficient  to  convince  an  intelligent  people, 
that  Mr.  jefferfon  was  originally  defirous  of  cQunteracling  Ge- 
nefs  intrigues. 


(     5'     ) 

WE  find  by  a  recurrence  to  the  National  Gazette,  that  after 
the  Prefident  iffued  his  proclamation  of  neutrality,  that  Gazette 
did  not  ceafe  for  months  to  reprobate  in  the  moft  fcurrilotis 
terms  the  co-idafl  of 'the  exec  the,  charging  him  with  the  com- 
miffion  of  an  illegal  ad,  and  with  a  flagrant  violation  of 
the  co  jliUttiO'i  ;  and  that  when  the  Frefident  ordered  a  profe- 
cution  to  be  inftituted  againll  two  Americans  for  v'toiafi  :g  the 
neutrality  of  the  country  by  entering  on  board  a  French  priva- 
teer, that  Gazette  accufed  him  in  the  harfheft  language,  of 
cruelly  and  i  legally  imprif  ning  innocent  men  "for  having  gene- 
"  roufly  forfook  their  country,  to  affert  the  caufe  of  liberty  in 
«  Francef." 

MR.  Jefferfon's  tranflator  of  the  French  language,  after 
many  fnnilar  attacks,  impatient  at  length  of  the  tyranny  of 
the  Prcfident  and  his  refijlance  to  the  iv'ut  of  Genet,  breaks  out 
m  his  Gazette,  of  Wednefday,  toth  July,  1793,  under  the 
fignature  of  Juba.  in  the  following  patriotic  ftrain — "  The  mi- 
"  ri'ijler  oj  France,  I  HOPE,  will  a£t  with  FIRMNESS  and  with 
u  SPIRIT  :  the  PEOPLE  zxe  his  friends  or  the  friends  of  France, 
"  and/»^  will  have  nothing  to  apprehe-id  ;  for,  as  yet,  the  PEO- 
"  PLE  are  tbcftvfrgfgn  of  the  United  States.  Too  much  com- 
11  placency  is  an  i'-jnry  done  to  his  caufe,  for  as  every  ad  van - 
"  tage  is  already  taken  of  France,  ( iiot  by  the  people)  further 
***  condefcenfion  may  lead  to  further  abufes.  If  one  of  the 
"  leading  features  of  our  GOVERNMENT  is  PUSILLANIMITY, 
"  when  the  Britiih  lion  (hews  his  teeth,  let  France  and  her  mi- 
"  n'ljler  act  as  becomes  the  dignity  and  juilice  of  their  caufe, 
"  and  the  honor  and  faith  of  nations.*' 

THIS  attempt  to  make  a  diftinclion  between  the  people  of 
the  United  States  and  their  own  government  (fo  congenial  with 
the  attempts  then  made  by  the  miniiler  himfelf)  and  this  ex- 
hortation to  Genet  to  dif regard  the  'will  of  the  government,  were 
nothing  Ihort  of  a  propo/iiion  to  transfer  all  the  powers  of  the  ex- 
ecutive to  aforeig.-i  agent.  And  fuch  was  the  diforganizing  fpi- 
rit,  which  then  prevailed,  that  another  Gazette;};,  the  General 
Advertifer  (now  the  Aurora)  finding  fuch  doctrines  counte- 
nanced by  the  fecretary  of  llate,  declared,  in  a  piece  under 
the  very  appropriate  fignature  of  a  Jacobin,  that  it  was  no  lon- 
ger pofiible  to  doubt  that  the  intention  of  the  executive  'was  to  look 
upon  the  treaty  with  France  as  a  nullity,  "  and  that  the  govern- 
ment was  preparing  to  join  the  league  of  kings  agalnft  France" 

So  much  were  the  enemies  of  the  government  elated,  at 
that  time,  with  the  conviction  that  the  fee retary  of  ftate  coun- 

f  5>e  t'ie  National  Ga/ette  of  July  179}. 
J  Si;e  the  General  Adverdler  of  July  1793. 


ti-nansedt\iz'ir  vie\v?,  that  they  were  emboldened  to  purfue  thofe 
high-handed  rneafures,  which  would  ioon  have  proftrated  OUT 
excellent  conilitution  and  placed  us  at  the  mercy  of  a  foreign 
agent,  had  not  the  people  themfelves  mterfjred. 

WHEN  Genet,  thus  fupported,  boldly  threw  afide  the  mafic, 
and  raifed  the  Itandard  of  oppofition  to  our  government,  the 
people,  whofe  government  it  was,  came  forth  from  New-Hamp- 
ihire  to  Georgia,  and  with  a  loud  voice,  and  an  impoHng  afpeft, 
iileuctd  the  meddling  and  crafty  foreigner,  and  put  to  ftight  his 
patricide  myrmidons.  Then  it  was  that  Jeff  d  m  '  \  !  It  expe- 
dient to  abandon  fo  rafh  an  JAtriguer,  and  i>  _.aat  on  tlic  fide  of 
the  people  ;  he,  who  had  greatly  diOik^d  the  conftitution,  while 
its  fate  was  doubtful,  but  had  apparently  approved  of  it  when  it 
met  a  favorable  reception  from  the  people,  with  his  ufual  cun- 
ning &&po;iticalfagacity9Ju]ffirted&t\eey  meafures  of  the  ex- 
ecutive, when  they  were  found  to  be  popular,  which  he  had, 
through  his  agents  rcfijled  while  the  conteft  <w'ah  Genet  ivas  du- 
bious. Then  it  was  that,  like  \ht  friends  of  the  infurreSion  cf 
whom  cihze  i  Fauchet  fpeaks,  he  wiflied  to  do  away  all  fufpicions 
of  having  favored  Genet's  intrigues,  by  a  parade  of  great  zeal 
for  the  independence  of  our  government  ;  for  thcfe  men,  to  ufe 
the  words  of  Fauchct,  "  as  ioon  as  it  was  decided,  that  the 
French  republic  purchased  no  men  to  do  their  duty,  men  about 
'•whofe  conduct  the  government  could  at  leaftform  u*'iec.fy  crj  'jctlun'S, 
were  feen  giving  themfelves  up  with  zfcandalous  oftentatlon  to  its 
views,  and  even  fecon  ding  its  declarations." 

IT  will  be  proper,  in  this  place,  to  ftate  foms  fafts  and  recur 
to  fonie  dates,  which  will  throw  great  light  on  this  fubjecl:,  and 
fully  corroborate  the  foregoing  fuggeftions. 

THE  proclamation  of  neutrality  was  iffued  22d  April,  1793. 
Genet  arrived  in  the  enfuing  month  in  Philadelphia  ;  and,  fup- 
ported by  the  democratic  locieties,  the  difcontented  and  fedi- 
tious  of  all  clafles,  and  the  National  Gazette,  immediately  began 
his  intrigues  againil  our  government.  The  United  States  were 
kept  in  a  ilate  of  perpetual  ferment  and  alarm  from  the  time  of 
Genet's  arrival  in  Philadelphia,  till  the  month  of  Augull,  when 
his  open  threat,  "  to  appeal  from  the  Prefident  to  the  people," 
roufed  the  people  to  come  forward  and  fupport  their  Prdident, 
and  thus  completely  overfet  Genet  and  his  adherents,  and  all 
their  wicked  machinations. 

Now,  Jefferfon's   letter  to  Morris  was  not  written  till  THE 
j6rH  AUGUST  ;   and  the  gazette,  publiihed  under  his  AUS PI- 
PES, was  filled,  from  the  moment  the  proclamation  was  ifiued, 
till  the  month  of  Auguft,  with  iwdives    againil  the  Prefideni 


(     53     ) 

-  jfor  iffuing  it,  and  with  exhortations  to  Gzn:t  to  perfijl  irt  his  ca- 
reer ! 

A  FEW  extra&s  from  that  letter  will  aggravate,  if  pofflble, 
the  grofs  mifconducl  oi  the  fecretary  of  ftate,  in  having  tolerat- 
ed fuch  treafonabls  fentiments  from  a  prefs,  the  editor  of  which 
was  a  confidential  clerk  in  his  department,  and  was  paid  by  him 
\vith  the  money  of  the  government,  which  he  was  thus  openly 
refitting. 

HE  informs  Mr.  Morris,  "  that  "Genet's  landing  at  one  of 
the  moil  diftant  ports  of  the  Union,  from  his  points  both  of  de- 
parture and  deitination,  was  calculated  to  excite  attention,  and 
'that  very  foon  afterwards  the  government  learnt  that  he  was 
undertaking  to  authorife  \.\\z  fitting  cut  privateers,  at  Charlellon, 
cnljfting  American  citizens  and  giving  them  commiffions  to  com- 
mit hojli.ities  on  nations  at  peace  with  us,  that  thefe  veflels 
were  bringing  prizes  into  our  ports,  that  the  French  confuls 
were  qffuming  to  hold  courts,  &c.  &c.  and  all  this  before  Genet 
had  even  prefinted  himfilf  or  his  credentials  to  the  Prefident :"  He 
adds,  "  Genet,  not  content  with  uling  our  force,  whether  we 
"  will  or  not,  in  a  military  line,  againil  nations  with  whom  we 
"  are  at  peace,  undertakes  a  fo  to  dire  El  the  civil  government  j 
"  thus  in  his  letter  of  June  8th,  he  promifed  to  refpecVthe 
"  political  opinions  of  the  Prefident,  till  the  reprefcntatives  fljould 
6t  have  confirmed ,  or  rejected  them,  as  if  the  Prefident  hadunder- 
"  taken  to  decide  what  belonged  to  the  decifion  of  Congrefs  : 
"  In  his  letter  of  June  I4th,  he  fays  more  openly,  that  the 
<(  Prefident  ought  not  to  have  taken  on  himfilf  \.Q  decide  on  the 

("  fubjetl  of  the  letter,  but  that  it  was  of  importance  enough 
"  to  have  confultecl  congre(s  thereon  ;  and  in  that  of  22d  June, 
*'  he  tells  the  Prefident,  in  direS  terms,  that  congrefs  ought  al- 
"  ready  to  have  been  confulted  on  certain  queilions  which  he  had 
*'  been  too  hnjly  in  deciding,  thus  making  himfelf,  and  not  the 
"  Prefident,  thejWj^  of  the  powers  afllgned  by  the  conilitution, 
*'  and  difiating  to  Lirti  the  occafion  when  he  mall  exercife  the 
"  power  of  convening  congrefs,." 

From  thefe  extrafbs  it  then  appears,  that  as  early  as  May, 
the  attention  of  the  government  had  been  excited  to  view  with 
anxiety  G? net's  conduct,  that  he  had,  even  before  he  was  accre- 
dited by  cur  government,  fitted  out  privateers,  enlifted  Ameri- 
cans, raifed  a  military  force,  affumed  jurifdidlion,  and  not  con- 
tent with  that,  had  proceeded  as  early  as  June,  to  undertake  to 
dire  El  our  civil  government,  dictating  to  the  Prejident  the  exercife  of 
his;  powers.  And  yet,  itrange  to  tell,  Mr.  Jefferfon's  tranfla- 
tor  of  the  French  language,  the  very  clerk  in  his  office,  who 
-  had  conjidentially  translated  ihcfc  very  infolent  letters,  in  his  news- 


(     54     ) 

paper  of  I  oth  *July>  publifhed  under  the  eye  of  Mr.  Jefterfon, 
"  EXHORTS  GENET  to  act  with  FIRMNESS  AND  SPIRIT,  tells 
him  that  the  people  are  his  friends,  that,as  yet,  they,  and  not  the 
Prefident,  are  fovereign,  that  the  Prefident  is  pufillanimous  ^  and 
that  Genet  has  nothing  to  do  but  to  act  as  becomes  the  dignity 
of  his  caufe  I"  And  ftranger  ft  ill,  this  clerk  thus  openly  encou- 
raging the  SURRENDER  rf  our  fe/f  government  and  INDEPEND- 
ENCE TO  A  FOREIGN  AGENT,  retained  his  place  as  confidential 
clerk  to  the  very  man,  who  makes  thefe  complaints  the  bafis 
of  Genet  e  recall,  and  the  affections  of  the  very  officer,  whofe 
duty  it  was  to  punim  fuch  treafonabls  practices  ! 

IN  another  part  of  the  letter,  the  fecretary  fays,  "  If  OUR 
"  CITIZENS  have  not  been  already  SHEDDING  EACH  OTHER'S 
"  BLOOD,  it  is  not  owing  to  the  moderation  of  Mr.  Genet, 
"  bur  \.it  the  forbearance  of  the  government."  And  yet  the 
fecretary  loitered  within  his  bofovn  the  ABETTOR  of  Genet  ! 

AFTER,  this,  who  will  be  hardy  enough  to  fay,  that  JefFerfon 
did  not  connive  at  Genet's  practices,  while  the  iffue  of  his  conteft 
remained  doubtful  \ — Ii:id  he  felt  the  indignation  which,  at  that 
alarming  crifis,  fwelled  the  heart  of  every  independent  and  pa- 
triotic citizen,  would  he  not  have  fpurned  from  his  office,  the 
foullource  of  iach  attrocitks  ? 

THE  wretched  apology  offered  by  Jefferfon's  friends,  "  that 
he  could  not,  in  3  f  :.?•:  country,  controul  the  publications  of  that 
Gazette,"  is  too  contemptible  to  require  an  anfwer.  Could  he 
not  difmifs  from  his  oiike  a  confidential  clerk,  entrufled  with 
ihefecrets.  of  the  deparLrnent  of  ftate,  who  was  betraying  his 
trull,  and  openly  abetting  a  foreign  agent  in  a  contejl  with  the 
government  of  his  own  co;i  try  ?  Ought  he  to  have  maintained 
any  further  ojjiciai  conueftion  with  a  Gazette,  which  exhorted 
the  foreign  agent  toperfivere  with  fpirit  in  ufurping  our  govern- 
ment, dictating-  tr.  the  executive,  and  committng  acls  which 
muft  terminate  in  :'"vll war  ? 

THIS  circumftance  is  fo  ftrongly  flamped  with  political  infa- 
my,  thar  it  can  admit  of  no  apology. — It  marks  the  views  of 
Mr.  Jefterfon,  in  colours  which  cannot  le  effaced  :  it  fixes  a 
ilain  on  his  adminiilration,  which  can  never  be  ivnfoedout. 

IT  will  not  now  be  denied,  by  any  perfon  acquainted  with 
the  ftate  of  public  affairs  at  the  alarming  crifis  of  which  we 
have  been  fpeaking,  that  Mr.  JefFerfon  was  averfe  to  the  Preii- 
dent's  iffuing  his  proclamation  of  neutrality,  and  that  he  advif- 
ed  the  calling  together  of  congrcfs,  deeming  the  proclamation  a 
ftep  too  important  to  reil  on  the  Prcfident's  bare  authority. — 
Whether  this  advice  proceeded  from  nfecret  wifh  to  involve  us 


(     55    ) 

in  war,  or  from  a  conftitutional  timidity,  is  immaterial  to  the 
prefent  queftion  :  certain  it  is,  that  fuch  a  ftep  would  have  been 
fatal  to  the  peace  and  tranquillity  of  America  :  certain  it  is> 
that  Genet,  and  ah1  the  Jacobins  of  the  country,  and  all  the 
democratic  focieties,  were  extremely  anxious  for  fuch  a  fk'p  ; 
and  \vhilethey  refted  all  their  hopes  of  war  on  the  cor:vol:i. 

t  congrefs,  there  was  no  man,  who  valued  the  welfare  of  this  coun- 
try, who  did  not  then  fhudder  at  the  idea  of  fuch  a  calamity. — 
For  had  congrefs  been  convened  in  Philadelphia  in  the  fummer 
of  1793,  bringing  together  all  the  pnjjions  which  had  been  art- 
fully excited  in  various  parts  of  the  Union,  finding  a  mafs  of  paf~ 
ftons  ready  prepared  in  the  metropolis,  operated  on  by  all  the 

\  wiles  and  intrigues  of  Genet,  and  the  wanceuvres  of  the  demo- 
cratic fcclety,  congrefs  would,  moft  undoubtedly,  have  been  driv- 

|  en  to  fome  intemperate  acl:,  of  which  war  would  have  been  the 
{mmediate  confequence. 

IF   it  was  fo  difficult  to  reftrain  a  party  in  congrefs  from  car- 
rying hoflile  meafures  in  the  winter  following,  when  th"  paflions 
had  considerably  abated,  when  the  public  mind  had  manifeiled 
fa  a  marked  wim  for  neutrality,  and  when   Genet's  influence  was 
f   almoft  proftrated,  how  irnpoflible  would  it  have  been  to  have  re- 
fiftedthem,  in  the  midft  of  thofe  agitations,  which  convulfed  the 
t    whole  nation,  in  the  fummer  of  '93,  in  the  midft  of  thofe  politi- 
cal tempefts  and  whirlwinds  which  were  then  directed  by  Ge- 
net ?  The  few  rational  and  moderate  lovers  of  peace,  Jnftead  of 
being   liftened  to  with  that  attention  which  their  opinions   af- 
terwards excited,  would  have  been  filenced  by  the  overwhelming 
acclamations  of  a  factitious  enthujwfm,  and  fwept  away  from  their 
ground  by  the  irrefiftible  torrent  of  exafperated  paffions. 

WELL  might  Genet  wim  for  the  calling  of  congrefs,-]-  when 
'  he  found  that  he  could  not  mould  the  executive  to  his  views  : 

well  might  he  rave  and  threaten,  when  he  found  the  advice  of 
'  the  fecretary  of  ftate,  on  which  he  had  depended,  over-ruled  in 

the  council,  by  the  difcretion  of  the  two  other  fecretaries,  and 

by  the  wifdom  and  firmnefs  of  the  Prefident ! 

THE  letters  which  Mr.  Jefierfon  afterwards  wrote  to  Genet 
and  to  Mr.  Morris,  and  which  have  been  quoted  by  his  friends 
as  evidences  of  his  oppoiition  to  Genet's  intrigues,  prove  only, 
that  Mr.  Jefferfon  poffefled  political  fagacity  enough  to  forefee, 

t  In  his  letter  to  the  fecretary  of  ttate  (printed  correfpondence,  page  75.)  among 
i  other  c-aufes  of  complaint  againlt  tiitfrtjiteat,  he  Hates  the  following :  "  That  he 
has  deferred,  in  fpi.c  of  ni}"ie<pccitul  yilinuations,  tu  convent  Confrefo  immedi.itel\, 
in  order  t<.)  take  the  true  \er.tinientiofthepeople,  tojixthtfolitifatji/iemofthc  I- 
nited  States,  and  to  decide  whether  they  will  break,  ftjlpcnd,  or  tighten,  thnr  bonds 
with  Frmice—an  tionejt  meafure,  whidi  would  Jrave  aiuided  to  die  ^overiiinciu  miu  h 
toniradictiou  W'Ajubterfuif, 


that  had  he  after  the  public  fentiment  was  fixed,  per  filled  iri 
encouraging  Genet,  he  wouki,  like  his  lefs  cunning  fucceflbr, 
have  been  difgracefully  difmiiTed  from  office,  and,  like  him, 
mined  in  the  public  cflimation  :  like  the  friends  of  the  infur- 
reclion  when  they  faw  the  government  ftrong,  he  therefore 
made  an  oftentatious  difplay  of  "  his  zeal  to  maintain  our  inde- 
"  pendence  and  (elf-government. "  It  is  evident,  that  Genet 
confidered  this  conduct  as  a  defection  from  his  caufe  ;  for  in  his 
letter,  referred  to  in  the  note,  he  complains  bitterly  of  Mr.  Jef- 
ferfon's  treachery  and  abandonment*  He  uies,  in  that  letter, 
thefe  remarkable  cxprefiions  :  "  Belides,  fir,  whatever  may 
"  be  the  refuli  of  the  atckuvtmettt  of  which  you  have  rendered 
"  yourfelf  the  ^encrvus  inftr.unent,  AFTER  HAVING  MADE  ME 

"  BELIEVE  THAT  YOU  WERE  MY  FRIEND,  after  having  INITI- 
"  ATED  ME  INTO  MYSTERIES  which  have  INFLAMED  MY 

"  HATRED  again  ft  all  thofe  who  ASPIRE  to  an  ABSOLUTE  POW- 
"  ER,  there  is  an  a<£t  of  juftice,''  Sec.  page  70. 

HERE  Genet  complains  of  Jefferfon's  treacheroufly  becom- 
ing" the  inflrumentui  his  recall,  after  having  perfuaded  him  that 
he  was  his  friend,  and  initiated  him  into  myjicries  of  ftate, 
which  had  inflamed  Genet's  hatred  againft  the  Prcfident,  and 
the  reft  of  the  adminiftration  ;  in  fact,  after  having  caballed 
with  this  foreign  agent,  and  by  calumnies  againft  the  executive, 
excited  him  to  refiftance.  Again,  page  73,  Genet  fays  to 
him,  in  the  language  of  reproach,  "  If  I  have  {hewn  firmnefs 
(in  oppoimg  the  Prefident)  it  is,  becauie  it  was  not  in  my  cha- 
rafter  to  [peak  as  ma"y  people  do,  in  one  way,  and  aft  in  another, 
to  have  an  OFFICIAL  language,  and  a  language  CONFIDENTI- 


NOTHING  further  is  necefiary  to  prove,  beyond  a  doubt, 
the  improper  encouragement  which  the  fecretary  of  ftate  had 
given  to  Genet  to  refift  the  Prefident's  authority  ;  were  any 
further  proof  requifite  we  might  refer  to  the  writings  of  Helvi- 
dius\,  written  in  the  month  of  July  by  a  confidential  friend  of 
Mr.  Jefferfon,  for  the  exprefs  purpofe  of  proving  that  the  Pre- 
fident had  no  authority  to  iffue  the  proclamation  of  neutrality, 
and  inviting  the  people  to  difobey  it  ;  we  might  refer  to  the 
obftrucliions  which  prevented  the  recall  of  Genet,  which  did 
not  take  place  //'//  the  i6//j  duguft,  though  he  had  dictated  to 
ztnd  i-.fulled  the  Prefident  as  early  as  June,  and  which  obftruc- 
tioris  and  delay,  muft  have  arifen  altogether  from  the  dtvifwn  of 


t  Thffe  writings  "•/"•(•  To  much  fuirf1^  to  Geret's  vi<»ws,  t.liaf,  in  hh  Ictrcr  to  JefFer- 
{'•    ,  ib  ve  qnote<|,  !;/.•  f'.\   ,  '    [   -in  jo':ii  o;i:y,    in  <  lit.  fort  •:  f  V:.s  opinions  which  I  meant 
"  ropi-'fifs   t;-vne  Wrhinas  which havtf  been  ptiblilhed  hire,  fiith  as  ihcfe  ot  Verha 
*•  HEI.VJD1US,"  &c.      '  I'agc  7,3. 


(    .57     ) 

<p'};ion  which  cxilled  in  the  cabinet  ;  to  what  other  cauic  crif! 
we  afcribe  the  delay  of  demanding  the  recall  of  a  foreign  agent, 
\v  ho  had  grofsly  infulted  the  government  of  the  country,  ircni 
the  beginning  of  June  to  the  middle  of  Auguft,  but  to  the 
powerful  fupport  which  that  agent  found,  even  in  the  depart- 
ment, where  his  conduct  was  the  moll  notorious,  and  againft 
which  his  attacks  had  been  the  moft  outrageous  ? 

WHEN  finally  the  meafure  of  recall  was  agreed  upon,  and  the 
fccretary  of  ftate  was  at  no  lofs  for  mateiiuls,  on  which  to  pre- 
dicate it,  when  the  Prcfidcnt's  opinion,  as  well  as  that  of  the 
public,  became  too  irnpoilng  to  admit  of  further  hefitation,  then 
the  fecretary,  to  whom  the  talent  of  epiilolary  competition  is 
not  denied,  produced  an  able  letter,  in  which  he  endeavoured  to 
make  atonement  by  elegance  and  energy  of  ftile  for  his  previ- 
ous mifconducl  and  oppofition. 

I  SHALL  conclude  this  part  of  the  fubjecl  with  the  following 
remarks:  ift.  The  circumilance  of  Mr.  Jcfferfon's  being  an 
enthufiailic  admirer  of  the  French  caufe  (as  Hampden  dcfcribes 
him  to  be)  is  far  from  recommending  him,  in  the  judgment  of 
real  Americans,  to  the  prefidency.  The  Prefident  of  the  Uni- 
ted States  ought  to  be  an  enthufiajllc  admirer  of  no  caufe,  but 
that  of  his  O'-v-i.  country  ;  cnth  Jinfm,  in  a  politician,  is  clofely  al- 
lied to  error  and  pq/Jlon,  both  of  which  are  the  baxc  of  good  go- 
vernment :  but  er.thiifiafm  for  a  foreign  country  leads  diredly  to 
fubfervience  and  devotion  to  fort'ig,"  r.'terejls  ;  a  chief  magiftrate, 
enthufia flic  ally  attached  to  France,  will  therefore  fccn  become  a 
dt<vr,ted  tool  of  France. 

2dly.  I  CANNOT  difcern  the  merit  in  Mr.  JefTerfon,  of  hav- 
ing, as  Hampden  exprefles  it,  forborne  to  facrlfice  th«: 
cnce  and felf  gowrtime -it  of  his  own  country  even  to  the  glorious 
caufe  of  France  ;  what  attachment  mull  that  man  have  to  his 
own  country  who  could,  for  a  moment,  coniider  this,  as  meri- 
torious ?  Were  the  faft  ar,  dated  (which  I  deny,  and  the  con- 
trary of  which  I  have  proved)  I  mould  never  be  induced  to 
view,  as  meritorious,  the  mere  forbearance  to  be  a  traitor  to 
one's  country,  by  facrificing  its  independence  and  felf-govern- 
mcnt  to  the  views  of  a  foreign  nation. 

IN  the  preceding  pages  it  has  been  fatisfaclorily  fhewn,  that 
Mr.  Jefferfon,  while  Secretary  of  State,  countenanced  the  in- 
trigues of  Genet,  till  they  had  proceeded  to  fuch  lengths  as  to 
roufe  the  people  to  fupport  the  Prefident,  and  to  compel  the 
fecretary  to  unite  with  the  reft  of  the  admin iilration  in  demand- 
ing his  recall. 

THIS  has  been  fubftantiated  by  various  corroborating1  rircum- 
ilanccs  and  direct  proofs.  ,  „• 


ift.  By  the  publications  in  the  National  Gazette,  by  a  clerk 
of  Mr.  Jefferfon,  reprobating  the  Prefident's  conduct  and  ex- 
horting Genet  to  perfevere  in  hi-s  oppclition,  for  months  after 
Mr,  Jefferfon  knew  that  Genet  was  refilling  the  government. 

2d.  By  the  obftru&ions  which  prevented  the  recall  of  Ge* 
net,  from  the  time  of  his  firft  open  a&  againft  the  government, 
till  the  1 6th  Auguft,  and  which  could  only  have  arifen  from 
Mr.  Jefferfon's  oppofition  in  the  cabinet  to  that  meafure. 

jd  His  advice  to  convoke  congrefs,  a  meafure  urgently  de- 
manded by  Genet,  and  his  oppofition  to  the  iffuiiig  the  pro- 
clamation of  neutrality. 

4th.  The  writings  of  Hehidius  againft  that  proclamation, 
compofed  by  a  confidential  friend  of  his,  and  quoted  by  Genet, 
as  authority  on  his  fide. 

5th.  Genet's  charging  him  with  defeflio--?,  after  having  pro- 
feffedto  be  his  friend,  and  initiated  him  into  tnvfleries,  which  h:-d 
inflamed  his  hatred  againft  the  government,  and  aceufmg  Lim 
of  having  two  languages,  one  cotifidential  the  other  official. 

6th.   His  being  an  fatbufiaftic  admirer  of  the  French  caufe. 

7th.  His  being  recommended  and  pointed  out  by  citizen 
Fauchet,  in  his  intercepted  letter,  as  the  man  whom  the  Patriots 
had  fixed  on  as  Prefident,  (hewing  that  Jefferfon  was  confidered 
by  Fauchet,  as  a  friend  to  Genet's  intrigues,  notwithftanding 
his  official  letter. 

WE  mail  now  proceed  to  notice  fome  other  features  of  Mr. 
Jefferfon's  violent  averficn  to  the  meafures  of  the  federal  go- 
vernment, which  will  ftill  further  prove  his  participation  in  the 
views  of  the  National  Gazette. 

THE  friends  and  advocates  of  Mr.  Jefferfon  have  made  no 
fcruple  to  boqft  of  his  abhorrence  of  the  leading  principles  of  the 
admihljlratipn  of  the  Ji:;ances  'f  the  United  States  ;  and  the  Nation* 
al  Gazette,  one  of  the  main  objects  of  which  was  to  abufe  that 
administration,  in  conformity  to  that  abhorrence,  went  fo  far  in 
one  of  the  numbers,  as  to  urge  the  neccjjity  of  a  revolution,  in 
order  to  overthrow  the  whole  fyftem  of public  credit. 

THE  leading  principles  of  our  fifcal  adminiftration  were,  that 
the  public  debt  ought  to  be  provided  for,  in  favor  of  thofe,  who, 
acccording  to  the  exprefs  terms  of  the  contract,  were  the  true 
legal  proprietors  of  it  ;  that  it  ought  to  be  provided  for,  in 
other  refpects,  according  to  the  terms  of  the  contract,  except 
fo  far  as  deviations  from  it  mould  be  aliented  to  by  the  credit- 


(     59     ) 

ers,  upon  the  condition  of  a  fair  equivalent,  that  it  ought  to 
be  funded  upon  afcertained  revenues,  pledged  for  the  payment 
of  intercit,  and  the  gradual  redemption  of  principal,  that  the 
cl  hts  of  the  feveral  itates  ought  to  be  comprifed  in  the  provi- 
flo;i,  on  the  fame  terms  with  that  of  the  United  States, -that  to 
render  thf.  -Deration  practicable,  avoid  the  oppreffion  of 

trade  a.id  iaduitry,  and  facilitate  loans  to  the  government,  in 
cafes  of  emergency,  it  was-  neceflary  to  inftitute  a  national  bank, 
that  indirect  taxes  were  in  the  actual  circumftances  of  the  coun- 
try, the  moft  eligible  means  of  revenue,  and  that  direct  taxes 
ought  to  be  avoided  as  much,  and  as  long  as  poffible. 

Nor/,  J  aver  from  competent  opportunities  of  knowing  Mr. 
jcficrfon's  ideas,  that  he  has  been  decidedly  hojlile  to  all  theie 
petitions,  except  perhaps  the  lait,  and  that,  even  in  regard  to 
that,  his  maxims  would  oblige  the  government  in  practice  fpee- 
dily  to  refort  to  direct  taxes. 

I  AVER  moreover,  that  his  oppofition  to  the  adminiftration 
of  the  government  was  not  confined  to  the  meafures  connected 
wit;  the  Treafury  Department,  but  was  extended  to  almoft  all 
the  important  meafures  of  the  government. 

IF  Mr.  Jefferfon's  oppofition  to  the  meafures  which  are  con- 
nected with  t:ie  administration  of  the  national  finances  had  ceaf- 
ed,  whtn  thole  meafures  had  received  the  fan&ion  of  la<w,  no- 
thing more  could  have  been  faid,  than,  that  he  had  tranfgrefT- 
ed  the  rules  of  official  decorum,  in  entering  the  lifts  a  gain  ft  the 
head  of  another  department  (between  whom  and  himielf,  there 
was  a  reciprocal  duty  to  cultivate  harmony)  that  he  had  been 
culpable  in  purfuing  a  line  of  conduct,  which  was  calculated  to 
fow  the  feeds  of  difcord  in  the  executive  branch  of  the  govern- 
ment in  the  infancy  of  its  exiftsncs. 

BUT  when  his  oppofition  extended  beyond  that  point,  when 
it  was  apparent,  that  he  wifhed  to  render  odious  and  of  courie  to 
Culvert  (for  in  a  popular  government  thefe  are  convertible  terms) 
all  thole  deliberate  and  iblcmn  ads  of  the  kgiflature,  which  had 
become  the  pillars  of  the  public  credit,  his  conduct  deferred  to 
be  regarded  with  a  ftill  feverer  eye. 

WHATEVER,  differences  of  opinion  may  have  preceded  thofe 
acts — however  exceptionable  particular  features  in  them  may- 
have  appeared  to  certain  characters,  there  is  no  enlightened  nor 
difcreet  citizen  but  muft  agree,  that  they  ought  when  clothed 
with  the  fanction  of  law  to  remain  undiftitrbed.  To  fet  afkat 
the  funding  fyftem,  after  tlic  faith  of  the  nation  had  been  fo  de- 
tiler ately  9xd.folemnly  pledged  to  it — after  fuch  numerous  and  ex- 
H'niive  alie.iaiicns  of  property  for  full  value  had  been  made  un- 


!   iunc, ;•:;•--- -.vlth  adequate  revenues,  lit'Jc  burthcnfome  to 
the  people—  in  a  tiir.e  of  profound  peace — with  not  even   the 
fiadow  of  any  puUlc  ncccjjliy — on  no  belter  ground  than  that  of 
tueorftic;i!m\par'j(hx;cal  dogmas — would  have  been  one  of  the 
7r;o|l  wo-/  jii;u*  arts,  that  ever  Jla'med  the   annals  of  a 

civilized  nation. 

YET  petitions  tending  to  that  diigraceful  refult  verc  main- 
tained in  public  d.'fcMiifi::,  by  individuals,  known  to  be  devoted 
to  the  then  fceretary  of  itite,  and  were  private! y  fmihd  upon, 
as  profound  difcoveries  in  political  fcience. 

YET  the  lefs  difcreet,  though  not  lea  ft  important  partisans  of 
tlci  officer,  fpoke  familiarly  of  undoing  the  funding  fv/iem,  as  a 
meritorious  work  :  Yet  bis  gazette  (which  may  fairly  be  regard- 
rd  as  the  mirror  of  his  views)  after  having  labored  for  months 
to  make  it  an  objecl  of  public  detection,  told  us  at  length,  in 
plain  and  triumphant  terms,  that  "  the  funding  fyftem  had  had 
its  day  ;'*  and  very  clearly,  if  notexprefsly,  "  that  it  was  the 
object  of  the  party  to  overthrow  //."f 

IT  may  be  juflly  then,  and  from  fufficient  data,  inferred, 
that  Mr.  Jefferfcn's  politic?,  while  fecretary  of  Hate,  ietukJ 
to  national  difvnior ',  inji^nificancc,  dif order  and  difcredit.  That 
the  fubverfion  of  the  funding  fyftem  would  have  produced  ;;«- 
ttojuil  (lifers ;'//,  proves  itfelf.  Lofs  of  credit,  the  reafon  being 
the  fame,  mull  attend  nations,  as  well  as  individuals,  \vho  vo- 
luntarily and  without  neceflity,  violate  \ki&x  formal  and  pofitive 
engagements. 


t  I  ];;;!  :nrbe  11  >;h  i'  T'l^l -p-ml-.-nC  C'iroriicL-,  (an  antiri\!eral  paper)    of  Septemb  r, 
1792,  rhe  follow"  115  publication  :--- 
MR.  ADAMS, 

AS  the  friends  of  en  il  !:berty  wifh  at  all  times  to  he  acquainted  with  _every  qoeflion 
\\liichappeairs  to  regard  the  publtc^^^I,  :'  grearnnmbrr  of  gentlemen  in  this  and  rn-: 
,  have  fuhftTJhfil  ft.r  ihe  N&ti<.n<'.l  Gazette,  publifljtfd  by  Mr. 
Philip  Frsnean,  it  Philade'piaa  :  and  ic  is  Inpc-il,  that  Frene.iu'1'.  Gazette,  wl;icli  is 
laid  to  be  pi-i.!.t«d  undt.r  the  eye  of  that  eftabuffliecl  patf'or  and  republican,  Thomas 
Jfjjerfon,  will  be  p,enenaiv  ukrw  in  the  New-England  Stares  C>. 

In  the Cclhihbian  Centintl  fof  Bclton.)   die  fuHowir.g  re|ily  appeared  a  few  days  af- 

"  A  Conef^jrr.i'et  t  :ti  !l;e  lail  C'irotvcle,  recnmmeji;!s  to  the  people  of  New-EnpV  r, :i. 
a  g,/ti<  >-3l  pen  i'\i  »i'  tl-e  Natio'nal  GT^-tre,  fii'1,  tn  be  printed,  Sec.  Wliether  this  is  in- 
rsnded  as  an  avov.al  on  ih<-  pirt  c.f  Mr.  J  h  //s  u  the  M?,7/,  and  the  Smjirndettt 

Freneau  only  the  now»»3/ editor  «.f  vliisf/i---./^  c;--<:;tte,  ihe  piibHc  is  at  a  l<.fst'.>  deter- 
mine. The  advice  is  adapted  t>  all  who  dtii-.ht  in  r!i»  irdt  violent  abufeona  ».iver:>- 
:ne lit  framed  and  .T!:-iiiiii<t^iy-d  :iy  t!-?  people  (.f"  Ar  er.cn,  to  th? honour,  diijvi-y,  ard 
happinefs  of  America  ;  and  all  who  aiRrft  too  mucii  learning  tb  have  any  #»«H,  wril  be 
plrafed  w'th  ihe  rerojp.i;  enda-ion.  T'i.e  Cltrry  of  -he  country  vilified,  rt!i::iai  ci.n- 
fian-ly  ridiculed,  mr.ft  a!]jr<!  a  r:c'a  r-v't  'n  ir.fideh  and  frtethinken.  To  deprive  us 
of  all  corifiderce  in  a  «overnment  itiftin.'ted  and  adminiflered  bv  nurftives,  and  ander 
the  anf.ncesof  v/li;ch  th?  United  States  have  i-r.-p.rriied  from  dllbord,  poverty  and  con- 
tempt, to  happtntiV,  w«aft!i1afid  honour,  :  ataflcw  rthyAfee  pwtrf"  a  malignant  ftra«- 
f.r.  t>  tnke  from  us  all  truit  :n  that retigior,  r..r  .vhich  our  piotvs  ancefiors  exchanged  a 
civiliz-d  country  for  the  vvildernejs  and  or,  wh;.  ii  wi-  'ciu!:l  our  brlghteft  hopes  tor  hr.p- 
pin.'iV  in  thisanH  a  firure  w  .  '  -.'t'i't  to  a  man  like  Freneau  :  but  *nre. 

ly  T.  A.iamsouiilu  t  i  ns,  bcfcre   lie  brings  forward  Mr. 

JEFFERSON  as  rhe  pttron  <-f  fucli  a  Gazt  tte."! 
Mr.  Jcffa  fun's  filcnds  nevtr  denied  the  trutii  of  ihe  paragraph  m  ti:e  thronic.e. 


:  and  ejj^ft&r,  aa  applied  to  communities,  e- 
qually  with  individuals,  are  the  natural    offspring  of   a  lofs  of 
.,  prcmsditatfiy  and  voluntarily  incurred. 

DISUNION  would  not  .long  lag  behind.  Sober-minded  and 
virtuous  men,  in  every  Hate,  would  iofc  all  confidence  in,  and 
all  refpecb  for  a  government,  which  had  betrayed  fo  much  le- 
vity and  inconfiilency,  fo  profligate  a  difregard  to  the  rights  of 
property,  and  to  the  obligations  of  good  faith.  Their  fupport 
would  of  courfe  be  fo  far  withdrawn  or  relaxed,  as  to  leave  it 
an  eafy  prey  to  its  enemies.  cfhcfe  comprife  the  advocates  for 
feparate  confederacies  ;  the  zealous  partizans  of  unlimited  fove- 
reignty  in  the  ilate  governments — the  never  to  be  fatiated 
lovers  of  innovation  and  change — the  tribe  of  pretended  philofo- 
phsrs,  but  real  fabricators  of  chimeras  nr.iXparjdoxcs — \.\\c.CataHnes 
and  Ctfars  of  the  community  (a  defcription  of  men  to  be  found 
in  every  republic)  who  leading  the  dance  to  the  tune  of  liberty 
without  /azv ,  endeavour  to  intoxicate  the  people  with  delicious, 
but  poifonous  draughts — to  render  them  the  enjier  victims  of 
their  rapacious  ambition  ;  the  vicious  and  the  fanatical  of  every 
cVfs,  who  are  ever  found  the  willing  or  the  deluded  followers  of 
thofe  feducing  and  treacherous  leaders. 

BUT  this  is  not  all — the  invnfon  of  feverty  millions  of  pro- 
perty could  not  be  perpetrated  without  violent  conftijjkr.s.  The 
itates,  whofe  citizens,  both  as  original  creditors  and  pure'. 
own  the  largell  portions  of  the  debt  (and  feveral  fuch  there  are) 
would  not  long  remain  bound  in  the  trammels  of  a  party  which 
had  fo  grofsly  violated  their  rights.  The  confequences  in  expe- 
riment would  quickly  awaken  to  a  fenfe  of  injured  right,  and 
intereii  fuch  of  them,  whofe  representatives  may  have  wicked- 
ly embarked,  or  been  ignorantly  betrayed  into  the  atlrcc'^i;  > 
and  deflructive  project. 

WHERE  would  all  this  end  but  m  dij "union  and  anarchy — in 
national  dif grace  and  humiliation  ? 

THE  votaries  of  Mr.  Jefferfon  vainly  endeavoured  to  vindi- 
cate his  conduct,  refpecling  hir,  connection  with  the  editor  of 
the  National  Gazette,  and  his  oppofition  to  the  mealures  of 
government,  while  fecretary  of  ftate. 

IN  refpecl:  to  the  fir  ft,  they  faid,  '*  that  Mr.  Frcneau  wns 
recommended  by  feveral  of  his  fcllo\v-collegiates,  men  of  high 
reputation  and  who  were  interelted  in  his  welfare*:  and  that, 
to  entitle  him  to  the  oRice  which  Mr.  Jefferfon  beitowed  ou 
him,  it  was  merely  neceflary  that  he  mould  be  a  citizen  oi 


•J-  S«-e  the  American  U:uly  Aii\er{iKr  ut'the  13/1  Oct'ber, 


. 

the  United  States,  irreproachable  in  point  of  morality,  and  in 
other  refpeds  well  qualified  to  difcharge  his  duties."  —  It  is 
at  once  feen  that,  fuch  an  apology,  to  an  enlightened  public, 
is  as  infulting  as  was  the  condud  which  it  was  defigncd  to 
glofs  over.  —  As  well  might  Mr.  Jefferfon,  fhould  he  be  eleft- 
ed  prefidcnt,  and  penfion  a  printer  to  fupport  his  meafures, 
attempt  hereafter  to  varnifh  over  fuch  an  a&  by  a  like  vindi- 
cation. 

As  to  the  fecond  point,  thefe  votaries,  whofe  devotion  for 
their  idol  kindled  at  every  form,  in  which  he  presented  himfelf, 
even  deduced  matter  of  panegyric  from  his  opposition  to  the  mea- 
fures of  the  government.  '1  was  according  to  them,  the  fub- 
limeil  pitch  of  virtue  in  him,  not  only  to  have  exira-officiatty 
embarraOTed  plans,  originating  with  his  colleagues,  in  the 
courfe  of  their  progrefs,  but  to  have  continued  his  oppofition 
to  them,  after  they  had  been  confidered  and  enacted  by  the 
Icgijlaltfrc)  with  fuch  modifications  as  had  appeared  to  them 
proper,  and  had  been  approved  by  the  chief  magi/irate.  Such 
conduct,  in  their  opinion  marked  a  firm  and  virtuous  independ- 
ence of 


IF  any  proof  were  wanting  of  that  ftrange  perverfion  of  all 
ideas  of  decorum  and  order,  which  has  long  chara&erifed  a  cer- 
tain party,  this  making  a  theme  of  encomium  of  what  was  tru- 
ly a  deinonnration  of  a  caballing  ,  fclf-fufficient,  and  refractory 
would  afford  it.  * 


I  SHALL  endeavour  to  (late  what  courfe  a  firm  and  virtuous 
independence  of  character,  guided  by  ajuft  and  neceffary  fenfe 
of  decorum,  mould  have  dictated  to  an  officer  in  Mr.  Jeffer- 
fon's  itatiori. 

I  DO  n^t  hffitate  to  reprobate  the  pofition,  that  a  man,  who 
h?.d  accepted  an  office  in  the  ej  ccntive  department,  mould  be 
held  to  throw  the  weight  of  hir,  okirafter  into  the  fcale,  to 
fupport  a  meafure,  which  in  1:  *  he  dtfapprovcd,  and  in 

his  (lation  had  npptfid  —  or  thattii-  .•  \  of  the  adminiilra- 

tion  (hould  form  togetlier  a  clofe  and  fecrct  combination,  into 
whofe  meaiui-es  the  profane  eye  of  the  public  mould  not  pry. 
But  there  is  a  very  obvious  medium  between  aiding  or  coiu:temwc- 
ivp,  znd  intriguing  and  machinating  againil  a  meafure  ;  between 
rt'P'fa-S  lt  m  ^3e  dlj  charge  of  an  official  duly  or  volunteering  an  op- 
po/iiion  to  it  :;i  the  difcharge  of  no  duty,  between  entering  info  a 
clcfj  andficret  cornbi  mt'ion  with  the  other  members  of  the  ad- 
miniftration,  and  being  the  aRive  leader  of  an  oppofition  to  its  mea- 
furcs. 


Tee  die  American  Daily  Advcrtif,-r  of  the  loth  Octcber, 


THE  true  li'.'e  of  propriety  appears  to  be  the  following: — A 
member  of  the  adminiftration  in  one  department  ought  only  to 
aid  thofe  meafures  of  another,  which  he  approves — Where  he 
disapproves,  if  called  upon  to  aft  officially,  he  ought  to  rnanifeft 
his  di (approbation ,  and  avow  his  oppofition  ;  but,  out  of  an  of- 
ficial Hue,  he  ought  not  to  interfere,  "  as  long  as  he  thinks  fit 

TO   CONTINUE    A  PART  OF   THE  ADMINISTRATION." 

WHEN  the  meafure  in  queftion  has  become  a  law  of  the  land, 
efpecially  with  a  direct  fanftion  of  the  chief  magiftrate,  it  is  his  pe* 
culiar  DUTY  to  acquiefce.  A  contrary  conduct  is  inconfjlent  with 
his  relations  as  an  officer  of  the  government^  and  with  a  due  refpefl 
as  fuch  for  the  decifions  of  the  legifiature  and  of  the  bead  of  the 
<xec::tivc  department. 

THE  fuccefs  of  every  government,  its  capacity  to  combine 
the  exertion  of  public  ftrength  with  the  preiervation  of  perfonal 
right  and  private  fecurity,  mint  always  depend  on  the  energy  of 
the  executive. 

THIS  energy  again,  mivft  materially  depend  on  the  union  and 
mutual  deference,  which  fubfift  between  the  members  of  that  de- 
partment, and  the  conformity  of  their  conduct  with  the  views 
of  the  executive  chief. 

DIFFERENCE  of  opinion  between  men  engaged  in  any  com- 
mon purfuit,  is  a  natural  appendage  of  human  nature.  When 
only  exerted  in  the  d"if charge  of  a  uty,  with  delicacy  and  temper, 
among  liberal  and  fenfible  men,  it  can  create  no  animoiity  :  but 
when  it  produces  officious  interferences,  dictated  by  no  call  'f  du- 
ty ;  when  it  volunteers  a  difplay  of  itfelf  in  a  quarter  where 
there  is  no  rejpo'lfibility,  it  muft  inevitably  beget  ill-humour  and 
difcord. 

APPLIED  to  the  members  of  the  executive  adminiftration  of 
any  government,  and  more  particularly  of  a  republican  govern- 
ment, it  mud  neceffarily  tend  to  occafion,  more  or  lefs,  dljlraS- 
ed  councils,  to  foft.tr  fadions  in  the  community,  and  particularly 
to  weaken  the  government. 

MOREOVER,  the  heads  of  the  feveral  executive  departments 
are  to  be  viewed  as  auxiliaries  to  the  executive  chief.  Oppofition 
to  any  meafures  of  his,  by  either  of  thofe  heads,  except  in  the 
fhape  of  frank,  firm,  and  independent  advice  to  himfelf,  is  evi- 
dently contrary  to  the  relations,  which  fubfiit  between  the  parties. 
And  a  meafure  becomes  his,  fo  as  to  involve  this  duty  of  acquief- 
cence,  as  well  by  its  having  received  his  f  auction  in  the  form  of  a 
law,  as  by  its  having  previoufly  received  his  approbation. 

ONE  of  the  powers  entruiled  to  our  chief  magiftrate  is,  that 
flo&jeSing  to  bills  which  have  patted  the  two  houfes  of  congrefs. 


(       OJ.       ) 

-This  fuppofes  the  drty  of  objecting,  \vhcn  he  is  of  opi'mor.  thai 
the  objec\  of  any  bill  is  either  mncofiftttiitiottol  or  pernicious  The 
approbation  of  a  bill  implies,  that  he  does  not  tlir.k  it  cither  the 
one  of  the  other  ;  and  it  makes  him  refpvnfiUe  to  the  comrnunitv 
for  this  opinion.  The  meafure  becomes  bis  by  adoption  ;  nor 
could  he  eicape  a  portion  of  the  blame,  which  would  finally  at- 
tach itfelf  to  a  bad  nicafure,  to  which  he  had  given  his  cor.fent. 

SOLID  as  are  thefe  principles,  the  public  ear  has,  not\vith- 
^ittjfeding,  been  frequently  affailed  with  common  place  to- 
pics, and  plaufible  flourifhes  and  declamations  againlt  them. 
\  V'YIT  inch  flourishes  may  be  dexterously  retailed  by  the  traf- 
fickers in  popular  prejudice',  thefe  principles,  founded  on  politi- 
cal truth,  may,  with  confidence,  be  fubmitted  to  the  deliberate 
opinion  of  an  enlightened  and  fober  people. 

IT  may  be  afted  —  What  ?  is  a  man  to  facriiice  his  cvrjlicnce 
and  hie  judgment  to  an  office  ?  Is  he  to  be  a  dumb  fpectator  of 
meafures  which  he  deems  fubverlive  of  the  ;%  /;Ar  and  i^icnjU  c- 
his  fellow-ci-ti/enc  ?  Is  he  to  poilpone  to  the  frivolous  rules  of 
a  falfe  complaifance,  or  the  arbitrary  di6tatesof  a  tyrannical  de- 
corum, the  higher  duly  which  he  owes  to  the  community  ?  I  an- 
fwer,  no  !  he  is  to  do  none  of  thefe  things.  If  he  cannot  coa- 
lefce  with  thofe,  with  whom  he  is  alfociated,  as  far  as  the  rules  of 
propriety,  and  obligation  may  require,  without 
alan<ia:-;ii:£  what  he  conceives  to  be  the  true  Irtcr.Jl  of  the  com- 
munity, Lt  \\u\pla-e  hlntjUf  r.i  a  fit  nation,  in  which  he  will  ex- 
perience no  col'.  'cs.  Let  him  net  divg  to  the 

honours  or  emoluments  of  an  office,  and  content  himftli  \vitl,  de- 
fending the  injured  rigbtt  cf  the  people,  by  olfcure  or  lndi're& 
•.">.  Let  him  renounce  afituatiou  \vliieli  is  a  clog  upon  his 
patriotifm,  tell  the  people  that  he  could  no  longer  continue  ir» 
it  without  forfeiting  his  duty  to  them,  and  that  lie  had  quit- 
ted it  to  be  more  at  liberty  to  afTord  them  his  bell  fei  vices. 

Sucn  is  the  conrfs  that  would  have  been  indicated  by  a  firm 
and  virtuous  i:.  dependence  of  chara£?i'er,  that  would  have  been  pur- 
i  tied  by  a  man  attentive  to  unite  the  fenfe  of  deiicpcy  with  the 
fcnfe  of  duty-~-  in  earneft  about  the  pernicious  tendency  of  public 
meafures,  and  more  folicitcus  to  a£l  the  dtfmicrejled  friend  of  ,  the 
V,  than  &€  izfyreftej,  ambitious^ 


BUT  Mr.  Jelferfcn  clung  ?orjou?  rr.7;v  to  the  honours  and 
emoluments  of  office,  under  an  admimilration,  whcfe  meafures 
:-eat]y  difapproved,  arid  perfeveringly  cpfroft-d,  when  a  very 
perplexed  ftate  of  affairs,  ?nd  the  alarming  firo/peS  of  approaching 
war,  could  alone  dictate  his  relhiquifhmeiit  of  a  itation,  then  too 
pregnant  with  anxieties  to  cci^inue  a::  object  of  deilre. 

END  CF  FIRST    PART. 


